Building a more complete theory of sustainable supple chain management using case studies of 10...

8/10/2019 Building a more complete theory of sustainable supple chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars.pdf

1/20

UILDING A MORE COMPLETE THEORY OF SUSTAINABLE SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT USINgell, Mark;Wu, Zhaohuirnal of Supply Chain Management; Apr 2009; 45, 2; ABI/INFORM Research37

COMPLETE THEORY OF SUSTAINABLE

SUPPLY CHAIN MANAGEMENT

USING

CASE STUDIES

OF

10 EXEMPLARS

MARK

PAGELL

York University

ZHAOHUIWU

Oregon State University

Case studies

of

10 exemplar firms are

used

to build a

coherent

and testable

model of the

elements

necessary to create a

sustainable

supply chain.

The

cases

build

on previous research

by

examining

the

chain as

an

entirety,

by

explicitly examining

both the

social and

environmental outcomes

of the

chain's activities, and by explicitly asking what these exemplar organizations

are doing

that

is

unique in

regards to

managing their supply chains in

a

sustainable manner. The analysis suggests

that

the practices that lead

to

a

more sustainable

supply chain are equal

parts

best

practices

in

traditional

supply chain management and

new

behaviors, some of which run counter to

existing accepted best practice.

Keywords

sustainability;

supply chain management;

case

studies

INTRODUCTION

Interest in green and now sustainable supp(y chains has

growing for over a decade and the topic is becoming

2006). However, there are still fundamental

is-

researchers need to address in order to offer man-

prescriptive models

of

how to create sustainable

First, much of the existing research has been focused on

of

whether it pays to be green/sustainable

e.g.,

Russo and Fouts 1997; Pagell, Yang, Krumwied and

2004). While important, many believe this ques-

is becoming irrelevant because i t is increasingly clear

ations will need to deal with environmental

e.g., Kleindorfer, Singha and

Van

Klassen

2006).

Second with some notable exceptions (see for instance,

and Sarkis 2004; Zhu, Sarkis and Lai 2008), the

of

the field has tended to focus

on

studies

or activity as opposed to looking at

As we review the

it seems as if almost every study posits a

as being the key to

Finally,

much of the existing research links previously

identified best practices to environmental outcomes.

And even many of the new practices such as design for

the environment and/or ISO 14000 certification identi-

fied in the literature have strong roots in previously

identified practices such as design for manufacturing and

ISO

9000 certification. While laudable, these efforts are

in a sense asking what

is

the same about creating sus-

tainable supply chains, as opposed to what is unique.

Equally important these studies and the literature

as

a

whole have generally ignored the social component

of

sustainability (Kleindorfer et al. 2005).

While all

of

this research is valuable, no coherent set

of

practices in sustainable supply chain management has

emerged. In the present study, we use case studies of

10 exemplar firms to build a coherent and testable model

of the management practices that supply chain managers

will need to engage in to create a sustainable supply

chain.

We

build

on

previous research by examining the

chain in its entirety, by explicitly examining both the so-

cial and environmental outcomes of the chain's activities,

and by explicitly asking what is different about these ex-

emplar organizations. We address the following research

questions about sustainable supply chain management.


2/20produced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

8

Journal of Supply hain Management

1. What are leaders in sustainable supply chain manage-

ment doing that is different from leaders in traditional

supply chain management?

2. Are there patterns of behaviors across these exemplar

firms that can be used to build a theoretical and test-

able model

of

an integrated sustainable supply chain?

LITERATURE

REVIEW

Discussions of sustainability are driven by the basic

notion that a supply chain s performance should be

measured not just by profits, but also by the impact of

the chain

on

ecological and social systems (Gladwin,

Kennelly and Krause 1995; Starik and Rands 1995;

Jennings and Zandbergen 2005). To be truly sustainable

a supply chain would at worst do

no

net harm to natural

or social systems while still producing a profit over an

extended period

of

time; a truly sustainable supply chain

could, customers willing, continue to do business for-

ever. As

far as we

know, no such supply chain exists today.

And none of the exemplars we studied claim to have

arrived at true sustainability. Instead most are signifi-

cantly more sustainable than others in their industry. So all

things being equal these more sustainable organizations

could continue in business for far longer than their av-

erage competitor.

A sustainable supply chain is then one that performs

well on both traditional measures of profit and loss as

well

as

on an expanded conceptualization of perfor-

mance that includes social and natural dimensions. Such

a conceptualization

of

performance is generally referred

to as the triple bottom line (Elkington 1999; Kleindorfer

et al. 2005). The triple bottom line concept has its de-

tractors because it

is

often used with a narrow accounting

focus Vanclay

2004) and/or

as

a means for companies to

avoid looking at their supply chain as a single system that

simultaneously impacts communities, economies and

the environment (Johnson 1991 ). These are valid criti-

cisms but for the purposes

of

this manuscript

we

take the

perspective that the triple bottom line is a tool to mea-

sure an organization s progress toward the end goal of

being truly sustainable.

f

a sustainable chain is one that performs well on all

elements of the triple bottom line, sustainable supply

chain management

is

then the specific managerial

ac-

tions that are taken to make the supply chain more

sustainable with

an

end goal of creating a truly sustain-

able chain. When

we

refer to a sustainable supply chain

we are in essence referring to an outcome for that supply

chain. When we discuss sustainable supply chain man-

agement we are referring to managerial decisions and/ or

behaviors. In an attempt at parsimoniously enhancing

understanding of the sustainable supply chain manage-

ment literature we have condensed the literature review

into three themes.

Existing Best Practices as a Foundation for

Sustainability

The first theme in the literature is an attempt to extend

what we already know about supply chain management

in general into the realm of sustainability. Numerous

authors have explored the linkage between existing

best

practices in supply chain management and environ-

mental (with almost no coverage of the social compo-

nent) practices and outcomes. These studies are in a sense

all addressing a deeper fundamental question: do

the

best practices and managerial systems traditionally asso-

ciated with well run supply chains support

or

hinder

efforts to become greener/more sustainable?

This focus can be obvious, as with studies that examine

linkages between TQM (i.e., Clark 1999) and/or

JIT i.e.,

King

and Lenox 2001) and environmental outcomes. At

other times the emphasis

on

existing practices

is

not as

dear. For instance, Zhu and Sarkis (2004) and Zhu et al.

(2008) present a model

of

the components

of

green

supply chain management GSCM). The work of these

authors

is

highly commendable especially because they

create an empirically validated model of sustainable

supply chain management that

is

comprised

of

multiple

(five) interrelated factors.

However, the majority of the practices that make up

their model of GSCM are modifications of existing

practices. For instance, their green purchasing factor is

comprised

of

practices such as cooperation with suppli-

ers,

auditing and

ISO

certification, all ofwhich have been

previously linked to sourcing to improve operational

outcomes.

We

can make similar arguments about most of

their other practices. Our point

is

not to disparage this ,

research. Nor

is i t

to suggest that this approach is

wrong.

In fact

as

Corbett and Klassen (2006) note, including an

environmental perspective with existing practices

can

lead to higher supply chain performance. Rather our

point

is

that even the literature with an integrative per-

spective

is

primarily focused

on

what is the same about

sustainable supply chain management with much less

emphasis

on

what, if anything, might be truly unique.

For example, TQM, JIT and lean have long been linked

to improved operational performance. And there

is v -

dence that these process improvement philosophies

and

their associated tools improve environmental perfor-

mance as well e.g., Clark 1999; Curkovic, Melnyk,

Handfield and Calantone 2000;

King

and Lenox

2001 ).

However it

is

also possible that these programs, while

useful, are not sufficient to become sustainable and long

term could even be hindrances. Benner and Tushman

(2002, 2003) conclude that firms that focus on process

improvement strategies such

as

TQM also tend to focus

on innovations that are incremental in nature. Over time

the incremental innovation efforts of these firms will

make existing processes more efficient and existing

products

of

higher value. However, the same firms

are

less likely to make radical innovations. In our context this

Volume 45, Number



Ten xemplars

that TQM and other continuous improvement

operational philosophies may be most useful for

an existing supply chain more sustainable.

the same operational philosophy may become

what they do to become

truly

sustainable.

Two

best practices in purchasing that have received

suppliers and customers are a component of creat

an environmentally sustainable supply chain (Carter

Carter 1998; Zhu and Sarkis 2004). Research

sug-

a few specific behaviors to support collaboration

sustainable supply chains. Goodman (2000) posits

engaging in the new/novel collaborative processes

Rao

and Holt (2005)

that firms need to educate their suppliers and

their suppliers educate each other.

A

second fundamental purchasing activity that has

re-

attention in the literature is supplier certification.

is one of the

few

areas where social issues

as child labor and unsafe working conditions

addressed in the sustainable supply chain manage

e.g., Teuscher, Gruninger and Ferdinand

the Supply hain

The second theme encompasses the large,

but

mainly

on

reconceptualizing the supply

in and changing managerial cognitions. The literature

on changing who

is

in the chain, what the chain

is measured.

A crucial theoretical discussion involves the ecocentric

which suggests that an organization should con

its

relationships with the broader social and natural

as a member

of

the community

is conducted, an organization should

of broader constituents in the

e.g.,

Shrivastava

From a supply chain perspective the most interesting

of

ecocentricity is that a sustainable chain would

or treated as adversaries.

have been the subject of research. However these

Egri and Herman

or as a conclusion to an empirical study that

ex-

e.g., Sharma and Henriques 2005).

key

component of sustainable

supply chain management, but that contention has yet to

be empirically tested.

There

is

also literature that examines innovation at a

scale that redefines what the entire supply chain does. For

instance, rather than just redesigning products and/or

processes, sustainable organizations could move to a

service oriented strategy (Sharma and Henriques 2005).

For example, in the chemical industry, some suppliers

offer chemical management services to electronic

companies to replace traditional chemical product

contracts (Reiskin, Johnson and Votta 2000). The sup

pliers work with the buying firm to design the pro

duction facility, deliver the chemical, deploy the

chemical

as

indirect production material, and finally

handle waste treatment. The buying firms pay the

suppliers based on a value-added service instead

of

tonnage

of

chemicals bought. Furthermore, in this new

relationship, the suppliers actually are motivated to

reduce chemical usage.

Such wholesale redefinition of the business may be

easier for small firms

to

accomplish (Hart and Milstein

1999). So while there is ample evidence that smaller

companies tend to lag when it comes to sustainability

performance (Min and Galle 2001), redefinition may be

an area that smaller organizations can exploit. This sup

position is interesting but generally untested.

Reverse logistics and closed loop supply chains are a

component of changing what the chain does that has

received significant attention, much of

t

empirical. In

addition to the need for a formal reverse flow, these

systems will require changes in design

Krikke,

Blan

and

Van

De Velde 2004) and relationships with other

members of the chain (Pagell,

Wu

and Murthy 2006).

Numerous authors have examined reverse flows e.g.,

Guide, Jayarama and Linton 2003) but with the

excep-

tion

of

a few theoretical explorations (Starik and Rands

1995; McDonough and Braungart 2000) these works

have been treated as part of a unique literature stream

that deals with technical issues and have not been well

integrated into the sustainability literature.

Integration

The third theme is that to create a sustainable chain

managers need to integrate sustainability goals, practices

and cognitions into day-to-day supply chain manage

ment. Responsibility for sustainability cannot be given to

a separate entity within the organization; it must be part

of

everyone's job, starting with top management.

The beliefs and behaviors

of

top management

as

they

relate to sustainability have been the subject of significant

study. There are numerous studies linking a proactive

stance toward the environment to efforts to become

more sustainable

e.g., Klassen

and Whybark 1999).

There

is

also evidence that this proactive stance needs to

be backed with a tangible commitment to sustainability,

April 2 9

39



Journal of Supply hain

Management

l

f

often in the form

of

a written environmental policy

(Ramus and Steger 2000).

Beyond suggesting the need for integration and support

from upper levels

of

management the literature does

not

provide much direction in terms

of

specific areas

of le

verage

or

focus to move from commitment to outcome.

Two specific processes that have received some attention

are measurement and design.

It is generally understood that good managers create

reward systems that link wanted behaviors to outcomes

employees' value. The sustainability literature has

reached the same conclusion at two levels of analysis.

At

the firm level there

is

evidence that linking sustain-

ability goals and measures to corporate strategy helps

to integrate sustainability into what the organization

does (Azzone and od 1998). At the individual level

employees need to be trained in sustainability (Starik and

Rands 1995), and then given incentives to follow

through (Daily and Huang 2001). Such linkages provide

employees the incentives to pursue sustainability goals

along with more traditional goals such

as

quality im-

provements. Without these incentives employees are

likely to continue pursuing only traditional goals

(Handfield, Melnyk, Calantone and Curkovic 2001).

Design

of

products and processes has been a focus

of

the sustainable supply chain management literature. Re

designing processes

to

prevent pollution has been linked

to improved plant performance

(e.g.,

Klassen and Why-

bark 1999). These performance benefits will mainly ac

crue to those firms that have the ability to innovate

(Christmann 2000). However, there

is

evidence that most

designers do not consider sustainability when designing

because of incentive structures (Handfield et al. 2001).

To

create a sustainable supply chain then seems to

re

quire proactive top management that understands that

sustainability

is

an organizational commitment. This

understanding may be evidenced by redesigning prod-

ucts and/or processes, which can only occur

if

all em-

ployees including the designers are properly motivated

and rewarded.

METHO S

The three themes in the literature then provide some

guidance as to what may matter as organizations attempt

to make their supply chains sustainable. However, the

literature

is

incomplete and it

is

clear that there

is

a need

to understand what elements are truly unique to sus-

tainable supply chain management, how these elements

fit together with each other and existing best practices,

and why this bundle ofpractices leads to sustainability; a

need to build theory (Handfield and Melnyk 1998). The

present study returns sustainable supply chain manage-

ment research to theory building via a series

of

case

studies

of

exemplars in the move toward more sustain-

able supply chains.

ample

Our

fundamental research question asks what the

leaders in sustainable supply chain management

are

doing that

is

different. Therefore a focus

on

exemplars

is

needed. In addition, while the literature has examples of

single

case

studies

of

leading edge firms (e.g., Goodman

2000) to the best

of our

knowledge

no

one has examined

multiple exemplars simultaneously to build propositions

based

on

patterns

of

behavior.

Exemplars are organizations that are well ahead of

their industry

on

either social and/or environmental j

performance while still maintaining economic viability.

1

Identifying exemplars in sustainable supply chain man-

agement is complicated because rigorous metrics of en- j

vironmental and/or social performance are absent in

many industries (Specter 2008). In addition, claims of I

sustainability progress are often little more than

green

washing (Preuss 2005). Given these constraints we r

identified a pool

of

potential exemplars using a range of

data, all ofwhich came from third parties.

Some

of

the potential respondent organizations had

received third party certification and/or recognition. For

instance, one firm was the first in their industry to receive

the

EPA's

Green Seal, while others had certifications from

NGO's such

as

the Rainforest Alliance. Other possible

respondents were identified because they had been

se

lected by state environmental regulators as examples to

show other organizations that

it

was possible to

exceed

regulations and maintain/improve operational effective

ness. We also used newspaper articles, articles in

the

business press, presentations at sustainability

confer

ences, investments in socially responsible funds and

the t

like to identify organizations that could be considered

exemplars.

Each of

the identified organizations had been

1

recognized and/or reported

on

in multiple outlets.

From our initial list

of

organizations that broadly

fit the

definition

of

an exemplar we collected data from

10

supply chains from

10

different organizations (see

Table

I). Data were collected in 2006 and 2007. Suggestions

for

the number ofcases to use in multiple case study

research

vary,

but

Eisenhart (1989) suggests seven cases as the

maximum that a person can mentally process.

Yin

(1994) and others are more circumspect in regards

to

1

hard numbers and instead suggest that data should

be

collected until saturation. In operations and supply chain

management research there are numerous examples of

multiple case study research using from three to

cases

(e.g., Pagell 2004; Wu and Choi 2005; Matos and

Hall

2007).

We

stopped at

10

cases because we were near or

at

a saturation point and were also reaching the limits

of

the amount

of

data that could be processed in one

study.

The level ofanalysis for the study is formally the supply

chain.

At

the two larger multinationals we focused on a

single chain as opposed to the entire company. This

focus

was necessary at the firms that

had

multiple

supply

chains because these multiple supply chains could

be

Volume

45

umber

l



Ten

xemplars

T BLE

I

Description

of the

Organizations in the Case Sample

Company

Description Level of Size/ Price Market Process es)

at

Which

Vertical

Ownership Premium? They Are Considered

Integration Exemplars

Cleaning Regional producer Low

Medium/ No

Janitorial Product design

Products and distributor of private service

CP)

cleaning products

for

providers

janitorial markets

Forest and Regional

grower

and High Large/ No Wholesale Operations

Wood processor of forest private

dimensional

Products products lumber

FW)

Electronic National e-scrap Very low Small/ No Consumer Supply chain

Scrap ES) collection and

vir tual

private and B to B design, reverse

recycling service

chain

logistics

Pizza

Local pizza restaurant Medium Small/

Yes

Retail food

Supply chain

Restaurants chain with 4 outlets private and design, operations,

PR)

beverage product design

IT

Multinational

IT

Low

Large/ No

Consumer

Operations, reverse

Equipment hardware and services public and B

to

B logistics

In

provider

nack Food Multinational Medium Medium/

Yes Retail/

Operations,

SF)

producer and private consumer

sourcing

distributor of organic food

and all natural snack

foods

Paper

National provider

of

Very low Small/

Yes

Consumer

Product design,

Products nontraditional paper - virtual private and some sourcing

PP)

chain specialty

printing

Lighting

National producer and Low Medium/

Yes

Consumer Operations,

Products distributor

of

lighting private appliance distribution

LP)

Food and Global distributor

of

Low

Large/ Yes Retail food Sourcing in the

Beverage

retail

food

and

public and developing world,

FB)

beverages beverage supply chain

design, certification

Building Local sustainable Medium Medium/

Yes

Homeowners Product and service

Renovation cabinetry and building private

B ~ )

contractor

different ways Bowen, Cousins, Lam-

We followed a theoretical sampling approach Eisen-

and Huberman 1994; Pagell 2004;

and Hall 2007) across multiple industries because

to become

to

a need

to

develop propositions

that

would be generalizable

to

a wide range of

on one industry might

not

design, operations

provide a full spectrum

of

sustainable supply chain

management practice. And second, we were concerned

that

there were

few if

any industries with large numbers

of exemplars which would have limited sample size and

further limited

the

applicability of

the

results. This design

decision mirrors many previous multiple case study

projects e.g., Pagell

and

LePine 2002;

Wu and

Choi

2005; Matos and Hall 2007). ur results are then by

nature limited

in

the sense that we

do not

directly control

for industry specific contingencies.

pril 2009

41



Journal

of

Supply

hain Management

Because no one company excels in all elements

of

sustainability the most important determinant i n sample

selection was area

of

sustainability expertise. Part

of

the

initial process of identifying exemplars was to categorize

where the organizations excelled based

on

external

evaluations. Our design goal was to have a mix

of

leaders

in product design, internal operations, sourcing, service

design, distribution and supply chain design. As Table I

makes

clear,

this design goal was achieved. The sampled

organizations have then each made progress along very

different vectors on

the path to sustainability.

Existing studies suggest that firm size may impact sus

tainable activities and outcomes. There is evidence sug

gesting that adoption

of

sustainable practices is more

likely at larger firms (e.g., Pagell et al. 2004

).

However,

Sharma and Henriques (2005) note

t h a t ~

small firms

can potentially create competitive niches via disruptive

innovations in more sustainable product designs or

business models (p. 175).

To

assess the effect

of

com

pany

size,

companies in our sample include a local

res

taurant chain, medium-sized regional companies and

three multinationals with global operations.

The motivation, discretion and decision strategy

of

publicly owned firms can be different from those

of

the

private companies. Therefore the sample contains both

publicly and privately owned organizations. Finally, the

sampled companies cover a wide range

of

manufacturing

and service operations, allowing us to examine supply

chains creating both products and services. This diverse

sample then allows for the development

of

propositions

that will likely be applicable to a wide range

of

supply

chains.

Interview Protocol

We used a semistructured interview protocol at all of

the organizations Eisenhart (1989) for two reasons. We

had designed the sample to include companies with

different capabilities, therefore a semistructured protocol

gave us the flexibility to focus

on

what was unique at

each of the companies. In general, there was some the

oretical underpinning for items included in the protocol.

For example innovation has been seen as a key compo

nent

of

creating sustainable chains (e.g., Christmann

2000) so it was important to understand how environ

mental and/or social issues were addressed in the inno

vation/design process.

Data Collection

The research design was based on the recommenda

tions

of

Eisenhart (1989),

Yin

(1994), Miles and Hub

erman (1994) and Handfield and Melnyk (1998) and

closely followed previous research in operations and

supply chain management (e.g., Walton, Handfield and

1

The protocol was made available during the review process and is

available from the first author upon request.

Melnyk 1998; Carter and Dresner 2001; Montabon,

Melnyk, Sroufe and Calantone 2006). The initial proto

col called for interviews with top managers

of

different

functions at each supply chain with an aim of under

standing the entire supply chain. We requested to inter

view:

A member of the top management team - at small

companies the president

or

COO, at larger companies

the person in charge

of

the specific supply chain.

The top managers in charge of operations, R D, pur

chasing, marketing and logistics.

One or more people involved in product and/or pro

cess design.

The person with responsibility for sustainability:'

In reality organizations are structured differently and

job titles vary. This was especially true when t came to

identifying the respondent with responsibility

for

sustainability. In most (8)

of

the sampled organizations

this responsibility was diffused and integrated into the

jobs

of

multiple managers, making

no

single individual

or function formally responsible for sustainability.

In

addition, the member

of

the top management team who

was interviewed was oft.en in charge

of

one or more of

the functions

of

interest.

So

while the research design

called for expertise in a minimum

of

seven different

areas, at most supply chains there were respondents who

had multiple responsibilities, reducing the number of

interviews but naturally increasing interview breadth

for

individual respondents. There were also a few

cases

where the initial interviews made t clear that we needed

additional data. In these cases we formally interviewed

additional respondents. For instance, there were financial

and legal implications to

IT

Hardware's reverse logistics

chain that required interviewing additional people

to

truly understand the system. The end result was multiple

respondents at all firms. The minimal number

of

formal

respondents was 4 and the maximum was 13.

Facility tours were part

of

the data collection effort at

the seven organizations that had their own on-site pro

duction facilities. And in one case we also toured a sup

plier's facility because the supplier did the majority

of

he

production for the organization's products. We often

informally questioned shop floor employees, engineers

and the like in the process

of

touring a facility. Finally

data were also gathered from publicly available

sources

when available. Web sites, published articles, as well as

awards and reports from NGOs and regulators all formed

part

of

the data collected for each organization.

Most

of

the interviews lasted between 60 and 90 min

ute with several lasting for far more than 90 minutes.

The

interviews were generally conducted

on

site, although a

few

were conducted via the telephone.

At

eight

organi

zations at least two members

of

the research team

con-

ducted the interviews. Interviews were taped at nine

of

Volume

45, Number



Ten xemplars

cases,

including the two organizations where there

a single interviewer. In addition, each interviewer

took their own notes to record impressions, context

so on. After each site visit, interview tapes were

Any new or interesting areas that arose from the

replication. This constant updating and improving

is

a foundation of

Data collection thus included multiple researchers, a

of the conversations, mul

respondents, an opportunity to observe production

most organizations, and data from archival sources.

design allowed us to capitalize on triangulation.

of data (in this study interview, archival

observational from the tours) to mitigate biases and

Tick 1979; Eisenhart

1994). The use of multiple researchers helps to

of any one individual researcher.

use of multiple respondents and multiple types of

mitigates the biases

of

a single respondent

and

in

the odds of capturing the organization s view of a

Coding was based on the transcripts, interviewer notes

secondary data. When there were inconsistencies

up

with the re

answered by interviewees through follow-up

phone calls and in two

cases,

a second round of

CODING ND ANALYSIS

In addition to triangulation, potential contamination

the researchers biases was also controlled by

was

complete, coding was done via a multistep

Coding was done to identify the extent of adoption of

of

these practices which were in

-

To

code these took a more detailed process that

cases.

basic coding process was as follows.

First, we

individually came up with a coding scheme

we

thought would capture those practices that were in the

literature.

So

for instance, lean had been previously

linked to improved environmental performance, but we

needed a rigorous way to assess the extent

of

lean at

an

organization using our case based data. We then met to

compare schemes and work

on

a jointly acceptable ver

sion of the scheme. Once we jointly thought we had a

working scheme for the existing practices we individually

coded the first case.

In the process of coding the first case we also needed a

way to capture two additional types

of

data; practices that

were familiar to supply chain management scholars but

which had not yet been linked to sustainability and

practices that were novel. So as we individually coded we

also captured any additional practice or set of practices

that was linked to enhanced sustainability performance

for the chain being coded.

Once we had both coded the first case we met to

compare classifications for those practices that the

scheme already covered. Where we differed we worked

out

why there were differences. Did one of us use different

data? Did one of us adjust a definition? Or, was there

some other problem? If the problem was the scheme, we

revised it and went back and recoded the case. If the

problem was one

of

interpretation, we worked together

until reaching agreement.

We

also had to expand the scheme to address the

practices that arose from the data

but

which had

not

appeared in the literature.

So

as we coded each case the

newly identified practices were defined and added to the

scheme. In other words the scheme grew with each case

which often necessitated going back to previously coded

cases to look for evidence of the newly identified prac

tices.

The same process was followed for all subsequent cases.

This was an iterative process

of

individually coding a case

followed by working together to assure consistency and

to improve the scheme.

We

did

not

consider coding

complete until we had reached consensus on each con

struct. The process forced

100

percent interrater reliability

between the coauthors. t also provided a check on either

author s individual biases clouding the analysis.

Data analysis itself had two main components: within

and across case analysis. Within case analysis helps us to

examine sustainable supply chain management in a

single context, while the across case analysis serves as a

form of replication

Yin

1994) where the constructs

of

interest in one setting are tested in other settings.

Within Case Analysis

Within case analysis is a process

of

data reduction and

data management (Miles and Huberman 1994). For

this research there were an average

of 75

pages of tran

scripts per organization, plus site visit notes and any

publicly available information. The goal of the within

pril 2009

43



Journal o Supply hain

Management

case analysis is to structure, define, reduce and make

sense

of

this information.

The within case analysis had five main components.

First, we tried to make sense

of

the business model

of

these companies and how sustainability affects the

company's operations and financial performance. Then,

we cross-referenced the organization's activities in rela

tionship to sustainability with what the literature posited

as being important. Third, we identified practices, pro

grams and policies that the organization was involved in

that aided sustainability that had not been previously

identified in the managerial literature

on

sustainability.

The fourth component involved identifying constraints

and/or enablers that were related

to sustainability. We

looked for evidence

of

barriers, capabilities and resources

that were either enhancing and/or limiting sustainability

performance. The final step was an attempt to synthesize

the previous four. In this step we identified which poli

cies, programs and practices were truly important and

effective for the organization. The end result

of

he within

case analysis was a concise description

of

sustainable

supply chain management practices at each

of

the orga

nizations.

ross Case Analysis

The cross case analysis

is

concerned with identifying

patterns across the various organizations. It is facilitated

by using a variety

of

tools to reduce the amount

of

data

and to display the data in a meaningful fashion (Miles

and Huberman 1994;

Yin

1994). Data reduction was

primarily done through categorization and pattern

matching.

The end result

of

the within case analysis is an inven

tory

of

factors that were linked to sustainable supply

chain management for each individual supply chain. In

order to facilitate the cross case analysis these individual

factors were compiled across the organizations. This was

done through a process of cutting and pasting:' Indi

vidual factors identified for each case were cut from

their original data displays and pasted into displays

centered

on

a single construct. The cross case analysis

then rearranges the data from a case by case format to a

construct by construct format.

Tables

II V

display a portion

of

this process. Table

II

summarizes practices that have been previously linked to

supply chain best practice and/or sustainability. For in

stance, many

of

the organizations engage in supplier de

velopment activities designed to help suppliers to be

come more sustainable. Supplier development is a pre

viously identified best practice in supply chain man

agement e.g.,

Krause,

Scannell and Calantone 2000) that

has also been linked to sustainability via mentoring (Rao

and Holt 2005). There was also evidence that internal

supply chain integration was an important component to

sustainable supply chain management. Internal integra-

tion has long been studied (i.e., Pagell 2004) but it has

not

previously been linked to sustainability.

Table II also contains practices identified as important

in the literature review that were

not

important to the

sampled organizations. For instance, the literature sug-

gests that lean and TQM are key components for sus-

tainable supply chain management. Yet our data suggests

that while most (8)

of

the supply chains in this study

perform well

on

traditional operational performance

metrics, the adoption

of

lean, TQM or similar principles

is not a salient factor that explains their achievement in

sustainability. .

The within case analysis also identified practices that

were reinterpretations of concepts that had previously

appeared in the literature and/or practices that were truly

novel. Table Ill

is a summary

of

these practices. An ex-

ample is transparency and traceability. The literature

provides discussions

of

transparency (e.g., Hart 1995;

Roth, Tsay, Pullma and Gray 2008). But discussions of

transparency generally involve a chain providing infor

mation to the public about what it is doing. Our analysis

distinguishes traceability from transparency. Traceability

is an internal practice

of

sharing information among

chain members about materials and methods toxins,

use

of

child labor, type

of

solvents used and so on)

to optimize noneconomic chain performance and min-

imize

risks.

Typical traceability activities included

demanding information

on

all materials used in a sup-

plier's product (even those the supplier bought) to ensure

that all inputs meet the buying firm's standards and/or

requiring that suppliers provide evidence that working

conditions were acceptable.

Transparency

is a new

but

related activity whereby

organizations were actually demanding information

on

the flow of money through their entire chain. The key

difference between traceability and transparency is that

with transparency the buying firm is demanding to

know

the profitability

of

every supplier in the chain, with

the

explicit goal of ensuring that chain members at origins

(in our sample farmers) made enough

of

a profit to

do

more than just subsist. Traceability is then concerned

with how things are made while transparency is

con-

cerned with profits across the

entire

chain.

From Tables

II

and Ill the data were rearranged

in

numerous ways to attempt to both reduce it and create

more meaning. This was a multistep iterative process.

For instance, one activity involved rearranging the

indi-

vidual practices into larger meta constructs with a goal

of

identifying individual practices that hung together.

In

one of our initial classifications we grouped individual

practices by function. Hence in this iteration supplier

certification and supplier development were put together

with all other sourcing management practices.

n addition to grouping we needed to eliminate those

practices that seemed tangential to

our

purpose and/or

which were highly company specific. So for instance, one

Volume 45, umber



Ten xemplars

T BLE II

Distribution of Practices Previously Identified

in

Managerial Literature

Practice

Previously Number in CP FW ES

PR

IT

SF

pp

LP

F

R

Linked

to

Sample Engaged

Sustainability in Practice

Proactive stance/

Yes 9

y

y

y y

N

y y

y

y y

organizational commitment

Reconceptualizing what the

Yes 9

y

y

y y

N

y y

y

y y

chain does - business

redefinition

Supplier selection

Yes

9

y y y

y

y y

N

y

y y

Collaborate with suppliers Yes 8

y

L

y y y y y y y

L

Integrate environmental Yes

8

y

y

y y

N

y

N

y y y

efforts into the entire

organization

Supplier certificat ion

Yes

7

y

y

N N

y

y y

y

y

N

Reconceptualizing who

is

in Yes

6

y

L

y y

L N L

y y

y

the chain ecocentric

perspective)

Supplier development

Yes

6

y

N

N

y

y

y

N

y

y

N

Reducing supplier risk Yes 4

N

N

L

y

N

y

N

y y

N

Life cycle thinking/analysis Yes 4

y

y

N

y

N N N L N

y

Closed loops/reverse logistics

Yes 3 N

y y

N

y

L

L

L

N L

Collaborate with customers Yes

3

y

N N N N N

y

N N

y

Measurement and reward Yes

3 L L

y y

L N

N

L

y

N

systems linked to sustainability

TOM Yes

3 N

y

N

L

y

L

N

y

L

L

Lean/JIT

Yes

2

N L L N

y

N

N

y

N

L

Commitment

to

employees

No

9 y y y y y y

N

y y y

high quality work)

Internal supply chain

No 9

y

y y

y

y

y

N

y

y y

integration

Sustainability helps in

No 9

y

y y

y

y

y

N

y

y y

recruiting/motivating

employees

Maintain and/or build culture

No

8

y y y

y

N

y

N

y y

y

formally

uy on total cost

not

price

No

4 N N N

y

N

N N

y y

y

Adding new suppliers

to

spur No 2

N N N

N

y

N N N

y

N

change/innovation

Y=yes they engage in the activity in significant amounts; N no engagement in activity; L limited

engagement in activity.

others. While intriguing, this seemed unlikely to be a

On the other hand, information

all guises has been linked to improved chain

Lee and Whang 2000 so even though

of

information

addition, this practice could be grouped with others

while licensing could not.

In general individual practices that had low levels

of

adoption, limited applicability and/or which did not

relate to other practices were dropped. We made excep-

tions to these decision criteria where the literature

strongly suggested a practice mattered or when the ab-

sence

of

a practice previously deemed important seemed

worthy of further exploration. So for instance, we kept

pril CXYJ

5



Journal of

Supply hain Management

TABLE Ill

Practices Not Previously Identified in Managerial Literature on Sustainability

Practice

Description Count CP

W

ES

PR

IT SF

pp

LP

Conversation Sustainability issues are part of

9

y y

y

y

N

y

N

y

daily conversation and almost

always part of decision making.

Not an add-on

or

something they

do on occasion

Touchstone

Do

they have a single value or

9

y y

y y

N

y

y y

value

guardrail that seems to guide

them?

Business

Does sustainability fit in business

8

y y y y

N

y

N

y

model model?

Traceability

Ability to track where something

8

y y

y

y

N

y

y y

comes from and

the

materials

that are in it

to

source

Dec-

Buying commodities on

5

y y

N

y

N

L

N

y

ommoditize

something besides price and by

inputs

extension treating commodity

suppliers as if they are strategic

- also linked to continuity

Developed Self-explanatory

4

y

N

N

N

y

y

N

N

own

certification

Supplier Suppliers working with each other

4 N N

N

y

N

N

y

N

supplier

to

improve the overall chain

interaction

Continuity of

Trying to ensure that all suppliers

3

N

N N

y

N

N

N

y

suppliers in chain, especially those at

origins growers) not only can stay

in business but stay in business in

a manner that helps to ensure a

reasonable quality of life

for the

farmers now and in to the future.

Should more than just subsist.

Note the role transparency plays

here)

Local chain

Source from closest sources

to

N L N

y

N

N

N N

minimize transport and maximize

freshness

Supplier Rather than helping suppliers to

L N N

y

N

y

N N

development improve with the main intention

to mprove of improving their own chain. SF

other chains

works with some suppliers

to

make them better suppliers for

others interested in all natural/

organic food

Transparency Definition: Detailed information

N N N

y

N N N N

on the flow of money in the chain.

Who

got

paid what?

Licensing

Sell designs/name/process

to

1

y

N N

N

N N N N

others

Y=yes they engage in the activity in significant amounts; N no engagement in activity; L limited


Volume 45 Number

FB

BR

y

y

y

y

y y

y

L

y

N

y

N

y

y

y

N

N

y

N

N

y

N

N

N

t



Ten

Exemplars

T BLE IV

Rearranging Individual Practices Into Meta Constructs

Meta Construct Practices from Tables 2 and 3

Count

Bundle

:

commonalities, Sustainability fits the business model

8

cognitions and orientations Proactive stance/organizational commitment 9

Internal supply chain integration

9

Touchstone value/ guardrail

9

Conversation

8

Integrate environmental efforts into the entire

8

organization

Bundle : ensuring supplier Decommoditization - within chain

6

continuity


6

Reducing supplier risk 4

Supplier development -

to

improve other chains

3

Continuity

as

an explicated concern

3

Transparency

2

Bundle

3:

reconceptualize the Reconceptualizing what the chain does - business 9

chain redefinition

Reconceptualizing who is in the chain 6Y 3L

Closed loops

3Y 4L

Bundle 4: supply chain Supplier selection 9

management practices -

Collaborate with suppliers

8

sourcing management Traceability

8Y/1L

Supplier certification 7

Buy on total cost not price 4Y/2L

Bundle 4:

supply chain management

TOM

3

practices - operations

LEAN/JIT 2

Bundle

4: supply chain management

Commitment

to employees high quality work) 9

practices - invest in human capital Maintain and/or build culture formally 8

Bundle

5:

Measurement Life cycle thinking/analysis 4

Measurement and reward systems linked

to

3

sustainability

Y=yes they engage in the activity in significant amounts;

N=no

engagement in activity; L=limited


on

the listof practices even though the chains

sample generally did not engage in these practices.

Table

N is

the end result

of

this analysis. However to

the data from Tables

II

and

III

into Table

N

required

to categorize practices and engage in the second pri-

of pattern matching. Two constructs in Table

best illustrate the pattern matching process. Initially we

of sourcing management:' This

II such as supplier certification as well as previously

III such as

dec-

supply chains seemed to be engaged in a new set of

N)

suggested that we really had two constructs:

sourcing management and supplier continuity:'

The moving

of

data from case based displays tocon-

struct based displays required multiple iterations. As with

any research, attempts were made to be both parsimo-

nious and complete, which lead to trying a number

of

different categorizations. The following are the five key

bundles of practices that arise from the analysis.

Bundle 1 Commonalities Cognitions and

Orientations. The sampled supply chains have a great

deal of variance in terms of size scope, types of goods

and services they create and so on. Yet they also have

common attributes, especially when it comes to

managerial orientations toward sustainability and the

role of environmental and social concerns in decision-

making.

The literature suggests that innovative organizations

will be leaders in sustainability (Christmann 2000).

pril

2009

47



Journal of Supply

hain

Management

So

in a sample of exemplars it should be no surprise

that all

but

one organization showed evidence of

having reconceptualized what the chain did com

pared with their more traditional competitors. For

example, Electronic Scrap has created a new business

that is radically different from existing models of

recycling.

The literature also suggests that top management

needs to be proactive or committed (e.g., Klassen and

Whybark 1999). Nine

of

the chains showed this

commitment. Similarly eight of the chains had in

ternally integrated sustainability, which the literature

also suggests

is

important (Handfield et al. 2001 ).

Commitment and

integration were evidenced in a

four key ways.

First,

is an alignment between the economic and

noneconomic elements

of

sustainability. Environmental

and/or social goals and activities had to complement

the economic activities

of

the organization and vice

versa.

At

eight of the chains, achieving noneconomic

sustainability goals generally helps to achieve economic

goals as well. For instance, Cleaning Products has tightly

tied its brand to sustainable products. Changes in

product design that allow for safer (for people and the

environment) manufacturing and use are changes that

allow them to expand their brand to new products.

However, two of the organizations did not have good

alignment between the elements of sustainability.

IT

Equipment had made significant investments in its

product take back reverse chain. However, this reverse

chain was not integrated into the forward chain and was

run completely as a cost center. This elegant process

worked to reduce environmental impacts, but it was

very expensive to operate. Improvements in environ

mental outcomes harmed economic outcomes. The

eight organizations that had business models that

aligned the elements of the triple bottom line were

profitable and growing because of their noneconomic

sustainability activities, while the two organizations

lacking such alignment struggled.

The second indicator of a proactive orientation was

the conversation at the organizations. While job descrip

tions and responsibilities generally look very traditional,

the conversation at eight

of

these entities

is

very different.

Sustainability

is not an occasional topic; it is part of

the daily conversation. Decisions automatically include

discussions of social and/or environmental impacts.

Sustainability is not an add-on or an afterthought; it is

part

of

what the managers

do

on a daily basis. For a

decision to be judged acceptable

at

these organiza

tions it has to improve one of the three elements of

the triple

bottom

line while at worst not harming the

other two.

Third, nine of the organizations had a guiding value

or guardrail:' At Snack Foods, it was their ingredi

ent philosophy;' which was sacrosanct.

All

decisions

about food had to protect this philosophy. At Lighting

Products, it was a philosophy of being thoughtful which

played out in their commitment to never outsource

pollution. They used suppliers in China but held them

(via third-party audits) to North American standards.

In

all

but

one

of

the organizations there was a succinct

way

for employees to describe what the organization valued

and how it did business. The guardrail generally defined

sustainability for the organization, was tightly tied to the

business model, protected the brand and was used to

guide decision making.

f

inally, as predicted by the literature (Sarkis 2001

responsibility for sustainability had to be shared across

the supply chain. At eight of the organizations no one

person or group was responsible for sustainability, it

was

everyone's responsibility. When responsibility is placed

in a single person and/ or department others do not take

ownership

of

sustainability. For instance,

IT

Equipment

had

a separate environmental group. In this organization

noneconomic issues were rarely part

of

the discussion

or

decision making for employees who were not part of the

environmental group.

r

The notion of being proactive or committed finds

support in the literature. What our data add

is an

ability to describe some

of

the attributes needed to be

proactive.

Bundle 2

-

Ensuring Supplier Continuity One

of the

most interesting constructs to emerge from the data was

the notion of ensuring supplier continuity. When

Japanese management techniques were first introduced

to North American managers (Liker and Choi 2004) one

of the supplier management practices that stood out was

the way first tier suppliers were treated. The practices we

observed are similar, but involved all suppliers not just ,

first tier suppliers. So while the goal of continuity may

seem familiar, six organizations in our sample are trying

to ensure that

all

members

of

their chain not only stay

in

business, but that they do so in a manner that allows

them to thrive, reinvest, innovate and

grow.

Table V

provides insight into what differentiates the organi-

zations pursuing continuity from those that are not.

Six

of

the organizations were involved in decommo

ditizing some or all of the chain. Two organizations were

working to move the entire chain out

of

a commodity

business. For instance, Cleaning Products was moving

from selling janitorial supplies based

on

price to

differentiating the chain's products by making them

safer to use and by providing additional services

along

with the purchase of the products. The other four

chains

were already differentiated,

but

now the organizations

were actively involved in moving their suppliers out of

commodity businesses. Intriguingly, and contrary to the

literature (Kraljic 1983) these organizations were treating

suppliers of commodity inputs as if they were strategic

suppliers. While other chains would buy potatoes,

lumber, basic metal parts and so on based

on price,

these organizations paid above market prices. Suppliers

Volume 45 Number 2

l



Ten

xemplars

T BLE

Pattern Matching Example

Total Engaged

Number of Respondents Number of Respondents

in Practice Who Do Decommoditize Who Do Not Decommoditize

Y

and L Engaged in Practice Engaged in Practice n=

Y

and

L

n=6

Continuity

Formal mention of continuity

3

3 0

of suppliers


to 3

3 0

improve other chains

Transparency

2

2 0

Reducing supplier risk 5

4

1

Supplier development 6

5 1

Sourcing management

Supplier selection 9

6 3

Collaborate with suppliers

10

6 4

Supplier certification 7

5 2

Traceability

9

6

3

Y=yes they engage in the activity in significant amounts; N=no engagement in activity;

L=limited


ere also provided long-term contracts and access to

upplier development resources. In return the buyers got

table long-term relationships, access

to

information,

access

to products in tight markets, reduced risk and so

n. Most organizations do not want to be caught in a

commodity trap, but in

our

sample a sizable number

of

organizations were actively helping their suppliers avoid

he same fate.

Supplier development, in two forms, played a

ignificant role in continuity. First, the organizations

hat were most likely

to

focus on decommoditization

ere also the organizations that were most likely to

engage in traditional supplier development. Food and

Beverage sourced globally and

had

opened formal

development centers located in the regions where they

ourced. Farmers were brought in and taught how to

grow

crops that met the organization s quality, environ

mental and labor standards. Suppliers who could meet

hese standards were guaranteed far above market prices.

behaviors directly benefited the buyers who were

making an investment to ensure that suppliers could

provide the desired inputs with the expected level of

noneconomic performance. Suppliers obviously benefit

as

well, because they get access to new customers, who

ill pay above market prices for what were generally seen

as

commodity inputs.

The second type of supplier development was

not

raditional. Three organizations were actively helping

heir suppliers to be better suppliers for other

rganizations. The development was

not

aimed at

making the supplier a better provider for the focal

chain,

but

rather on improving the supplier s ability to

serve others. For instance, Snack Foods helped to educate

their suppliers on providing inputs to the all natural and

organic markets, to their competitors. This activity

provided

no

direct benefits to the focal organization

but

significant benefits accrued to the supplier.

Continuity was also evidenced by a focus

on

reducing

supplier risk. For instance, Pizza Restaurants wanted to

move into selling their own branded soda made with

locally grown fruit. They did not have the capability or

space

to do

any of the needed processes, so they helped a

local beer brewery purchase the required equipment,

with the understanding that over time the equipment

would become the brewery s. They bought the supplier

the needed equipment to move into a

new, but

highly

speculative business and provided a guaranteed customer

for the process.

Finally two organizations were engaged in increas

ing transparency. Within our

context transparency

is

requiring detailed information

on

the flows of money

in the chain to origins. Transparency provides insight into

what is happening in the chain and enables improve

ments. But transparency also has a strong element

of

social responsibility because it helps to ensure that

no

one

in the chain is being abused. In a fully transparent chain

a supplier

is

guaranteed a reasonable living; ensuring

that the supplier

is

available for future business and has

the resources to make improvements that benefit the

chain.

Continuity benefits the focal firm in that it guaran

tees a stable and capable supply base. A concern for

April 2 9

9



Journal of Supply Chain Management

l

continuity that extends all the way to origins is also one

of the more measurable social components of sustainable

supply chain management.

t is

interesting to note that

while many supply chains are chasing lower wages to

parts of the globe with questionable social and/or

environmental protections, many of the organizations in

our sample are profitably moving in a different direction.

Bundle 3

-

Reconceptualize

the

Chain

The literature

suggests three basic forms of reconceptualization:

changing what the chain does, moving toward closed

loop systems and reconceptualizing who is in the chain.

Nine chains have reconceptualized what their chain does,

and while closed loops are not yet common the sample

seems to be moving in that direction. Six of the sampled

organizations are also engaging in a rethinking ofwho is

in the chain by following the path suggested by the

ecocentridty literature (Gladwin et al. 1995) and

collaborating with entities that many managers would

either ignore or treat as adversaries. For instance, Food

and Beverage is well known for their collaborations with

NGOs and other nonprofits.

But this

is

not an isolated behavior. Pizza Restaurants

partner with NGOs, work with local governments, are

part of a collaboration that includes competitors, and

help their suppliers interact with each other. Both

organizations are treating these entities as knowledge

suppliers, not potential sources of trouble. The

literature suggests such behavior may be necessary to

become more sustainable; our sample provides initial

empirical evidence for such a proposition.

Bundle 4 -

upply

Chain

Management

Practices Much

of the existing literature is built on linking existing best

practices in traditional supply chain management to

sustainability. Our data in general support a contention

that sustainable chains engage in many managerial

practices that the literature deems best practice from a

traditional (profits

as

main measure of performance)

standpoint. But our sampled organizations also differ

from the literature in some key ways.

With the exception of the focus on continuity, the

sampled firms are generally behaving in the manner

predicted by the literature when it comes to sourcing.

Nine tie supplier selection decisions to sustainability

goals. Eight collaborate with their suppliers to help

achieve sustainability goals. Seven certify suppliers on

social and/ or environmental actions and outcomes. And

six are involved in supplier development activities related

to improving supplier performance

on

environmental

and/or social outcomes that are important to the chain.

Nine are involved in traceability efforts with their

suppliers. Our sampled organizations demanded infor

mation from suppliers on how products were made, the

byproducts of their production, materials used (and

often sources of materials) and so on. The initial intent

of

these efforts

was

to ensure that their own business was

not put at risk by suppliers knowingly or inadvertently

using material and/or processes that could harm people

and/or the environment. But these additional efforts to

gather information generally lead to increased knowl

edge about how processes were being done, knowledge

which most of the chains were using to improve the

chain

as

a whole. Traceability then increased the

effec-

tiveness

of

the sourcing portion

of

the chain and reduced

risk

Traceability,

as

we have operationalized,

is

a novel

form

of

information sharing. But the rest

of

the

sourcing side activities that our sampled supply chains

are engaging in can be found in the traditional supply

chain management literature. Sustainable chains engage

in many of the same sourcing practices associated with

traditional best practice in supply chain management.

A conclusion related to the practices used to manage

internal operations is not as

de r

cut. Certain practices

associated with continuous improvement such

as

com

mitting to employees are evident in most

of

the sample

(7) but only one

of

the organizations could truly be

called a leader inTQM and/or lean. This may be a sample

specific result. But

it is

also possible that continuous

improvement based philosophies inhibit radical inno

vation (Benner and Tushman 2002, 2003

.

It may or may

not be a coincidence that the one truly lean exemplar in

the sample is

IT

Equipment, which has designed their

reverse chain in a manner such that it does not upset

their preexisting efficient lean forward chain.

Being

unwilling or unable to disrupt existing processes is

certainly the type of limitation that Bennen and

Tushman s work would predict.

Logistics

and transportation was generally not an

area

of

focus in our sample. Beyond efforts to reduce pack-

aging and/or change the type of shipping containers used,

the logistics managers at the sampled organizations had

the most traditional jobs in the sample. This may

be

because a traditional goal in logistics is to reduce

shipping costs, which

is

generally tightly tied

to

reducing fuel use and cutting the costs of packaging.

The one exception to the above is the focus on reverse

chains. While only three of the organizations are

currently heavily involved in dosing loops, seven of

them have some sort

of

dosed loop system and/or

use

waste streams as inputs. Electronic Scrap s entire business

model was premised

on

using waste streams as inputs.

In

addition, Snack Foods was using the cooking oil from

their facility to create biofuels for their vehicles. In

general the sample seems to be moving toward

an

increased emphasis

on

dosing loops.

One final issue emerged from the data; sustainable

chains invest in human capital. This may be one of

the

most concrete social outcomes in our sample. Nine

have

human resource practices that increase employee

well-

being and commitment to the organization. In addition,

eight formally (one

of

the remaining two does this

informally) work to build and maintain a culture

that

Volume 45 Number 2



Ten

xemplars

values

people and the environment. Employees con

sistently described their employers as thoughtful, car

ing,

committed and so on. This investment was often

started

as

part of a social agenda. For instance, Lighting

Products goes

out of

its way to hire refugees while

Electronic

Scrap creates work for groups with very high

levels

of

unemployment such

as

the developmentally

disabled. However, over time these behaviors have

strengthened the chains that engage in them.

In

sum, sustainable chains are engaging in a wide array

of managerial practices, many

of

which are familiar, that

have previously been linked to enhanced operational/

organization performance. And some of the novel

practices such

as

a focus on traceability and/or trans

parency are novel forms

of

existing practices (infor

mation sharing). In general the external focus is on

sourcing while the internal focus

is

on investing in

employees.

An

operational forus

on

TQM and/or

Lean

is not evident in our sample. And while reverse chains are

not the norm, presently this seems to

e

the direction

that the sampled chains are heading.

Bundle -

Measurement One area that

is

a focus

of

the

literature is measurement and rewards

e.g.,

Sroufe

003). While all

of

the organizations were measuring

heir noneconomic impacts in some form

or

another,

hey all also struggled in this area. At the organizational

evel they were working without benchmarks. It

is

ossible to track energy use in your own facilities,

ut

it

is much harder to determine if you are using more or

ess energy than competitors. So while all

ut

one of the

rganizations could show that they had made internal

gress to become more sustainable, none could be sure

e they were to truly being sustainable.

One formal tool to try to capture the true impacts

of

a

of

the organizations were using some form

ut

most

of

these efforts were fairly

of

the chain and not the

While nine of the organizations were committed to

als. In general the individual

or social im

s, if they existed at

all,

were intrinsic. Intrinsic

of

such an out

However, many

of

the organizations also reported

of

commitment to the noneconomic

of sustainability across the organization. At

th Snack Foods and Lighting Products managers noted

not

a concern

of

shop floor

employees. And at Food and

Beverage

there were

significant pockets within the managerial ranks where

the focus on sustainability had not permeated. For those

employees for whom sustainability did not resonate,

extrinsic linkages between sustainability goals and

employee outcomes were needed but generally absent.

When it comes to measuring the noneconomic

components

of

sustainability the respondent organi

zations are just beginning to truly understand their

entire impact. And one significant limitation in the

sample seems to be directly linking noneconomic goals

to employees incentives and behaviors.

DISCUSSION

Our analysis suggests that the practices that lead to a

more sustainable supply chain are equal parts best

practices in traditional supply chain management and

new behaviors. Our findings are summarized in Figure

1.

The ability to be innovative has been linked to

sustainability. Our sample is by nature comprised of in

novative firms.

So

an organizational capability to inno

vate is then a precursor to successful sustainable supply

chain management. The other organizational attribute

that is a precursor to sustainable supply chain manage

ment

is

managerial orientation. The literature suggests

that firms need to be proactive and committed. Our

analysis suggests that being proactive and committed can

only be effective

if

the business model and the environ

mental and social elements of sustainability are aligned.

This business model then guides decision making. In the

case of our sample this guidance was provided

by

touchstone values. When the employees have a

way

to

think about sustainability that is compatible with busi-

ness goals it

is

then possible for sustainability to become

part of the day to day conversation. But that can only

happen if responsibility for the noneconomic compo

nents of sustainability is shared across all employees and

not housed in a single function or individual.

Proposition

1: An

innovation capability

is

required to

create a sustainable supply chain.

Proposition

2:

A positive management orientation to

ward sustainability

is

required to create a sustainable

supply chain.

Proposit ion 2a: Management orientation is evidenced by

a business model where economic goals are compatible

with environmental and social goals.

Proposition 2b: Management orientation

is

evidenced

by sustainability being part of the day-to-day conversa-

tion.

Proposition 2c: Managerial orientation is evidenced by a

touchstone value that guides decision making.

Proposition 2d: Managerial orientation

is

evidenced

by

responsibility for social and environmental concerns

being shared across the organization.

April

2 9

5



Journal

of

Supply

hain

Management

FIGURE1

A Model of Sustainable Supply Chain anagement Practices

Design Innovation

Capability

Beyond Lean TOM

Product Positioning

Managerial Orientation

Toward Sustainability

Re-conceptualizing Who Is

n

the

Supply Chain

NGO, Competitors, Trade Groups

Having an Economically

Viable Supply Chain

Sustainability Outcomes

- Simultaneous High

Guardrail Value

Focus on Supply Base Continuity

>-- - - - -Per formance

on

Indicators of Economic,

Environmental and

Social Performance

Alignment of

Environmental, Social

and Economic Goals

Transparency

Traceability

Proactive and

Commitment

Supplier Certification

Decommodization

Integration

New Behaviors

Rewards and

Incentives

Intrinsic Extrinsic

Proposition 3: Sustainability becomes integrated in the

organization

when the

organization has

both

a manage

rial orientation toward sustainability

and an

innovation

capability.

The data suggest that those organizations which have

an

innovation capability

and

a managerial orientation

toward sustainability will engage

in

two unique sets of

activities. First, they will reconceptualize who is

in

the

supply chain. Rather than viewing NGOs and the like as

adversaries, sustainable supply chains leverage the skills

and abilities of these nontraditional chain members.

Proposition 4: Managers

of

sustainable supply chains

will collaborate with nontraditional members such as

NGOs, regulators, competitors

and

members of the com

munity.

Proposition 5: Managers

of

sustainable chains will treat

supplier continuity as

an

important outcome.

Proposition

Sa: Practices such as decommoditization,

transparency, tradition and nontraditional supplier

de-

velopment, and reducing supplier risk enhance supplier

continuity.

A

component

of being sustainable is economic viabil

ity.

Therefore, a sustainable chain based

on

the triple

bottom

line would have to

be

sustainable from a tradi

tional economic standpoint.

Our

data strongly support

such a supposition. The sampled supply chains are gen-

erally economically viable

and

engaged

in

practices the

literature associates with increased profitability. However

the

data suggest

that

existing bes t practices are

not

uni

versally linked to high levels of sustainability perfor

mance. Traditional best practices

in

purchasing and

human resources seem to

be

tied to all elements of the

triple

bottom

line. However, there is no evidence that

lean or TQM

is

needed to become a leader at sustainable

supply chain management. On the

other

hand, some

concern for

dosing

loops

and

reverse logistics does

seem

to

be

required to make further progress toward sustain

ability.

A concern for supplier continuity is the second activity

or

practice

that

will arise from the ability

to

innovate

and

a management orientation toward sustainability. There

are multiple elements of continuity all of which seem

linked to improving the flows

of

information

in

the

chain with

an end

goal of ensuring that all members of

the chain not only survive but thrive. However, the

adoption of some of individual practices is limited,

suggesting that additional contingencies are at work. We

explore this possibility further whe

Date post:	02-Jun-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	joannakam
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Building a more complete theory of sustainable supple chain management using case studies of 10...

Documents