A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains

[EN] Sustainability practice within supply chains remains in an early development phase. Enterprises still need tools that support the integration of sustainability strategy into their activity, and to align their sustainability strategy with the supplier selection process. This paper proposes a methodology using a multi-criteria technique to support supplier selection decisions by taking two groups of inputs that integrate sustainability performance: supply chain performance and supplier assessment criteria. With the proposed methodology, organisations will have a tool to select suppliers based on their development towards sustainability and on their alignment with the supply chain strategy towards sustainability. The methodology is applied to an agri-food supply chain to assess sustainability in the supplier selection process.The authors of this publication acknowledge the contribution of Project GV/2017/065 'Development of a decision support tool for the management and improvement of sustainability in supply chains', funded by the Regional Valencian Government. Also, the authors acknowledge Project 691249, RUC-APS: Enhancing and implementing knowledge-based ICT solutions within high risk and uncertain conditions for agriculture production systems (www.ruc-aps.eu), funded by the European Union according to funding scheme H2020-MSCA-RISE-2015.Verdecho Sáez, MJ.; Alarcón Valero, F.; Pérez Perales, D.; Alfaro Saiz, JJ.; Rodríguez Rodríguez, R. (2021). A methodology to select suppliers to increase sustainability within supply chains. Central European Journal of Operations Research. 29:1231-1251. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10100-019-00668-3S1231125129Agarwal G, Vijayvargy L (2012) Green supplier assessment in environmentally responsive supply chains through analytical network process. In: Proceedings international multiconference of engineers and computer scientists, Hong KongAgeron B, Gunasekaran A, Spalanzani A (2012) Sustainable supply management: an empirical study. Int J Prod Econ 140(1):168–182Akarte MM, Surendra NV, Ravi B, Rangaraj N (2001) Web based casting supplier evaluation using analytical hierarchy process. J Oper Res Soc 52:511–522Alfaro Saiz JJ, Rodríguez R, Ortiz Bas A, Verdecho MJ (2010) An information architecture for a performance management framework by collaborating SMEs. Comput Ind 61:676–685Alfaro JJ, Ortiz A, Rodríguez R (2007) Performance measurement system for enterprise networks. Int J Prod Perform Manag 56(4):305–334Awasthi A, Govindan K, Gold S (2018) Multi-tier sustainable global supplier selection using a fuzzy AHP-VIKOR based approach. Int J Prod Econ 195:106–117Azadnia AH, Ghadimi P, Zameri M, Saman M, Wong KY, Heavey C (2013) An integrated approach for sustainable supplier selection using fuzzy logic and fuzzy AHP. Appl Mech Mater 315:206–221Azimifard A, Moosavirad SH, Ariafar S (2018) Selecting sustainable supplier countries for Iran’s steel industry at three levels by using AHP and TOPSIS methods. Resour Pol 57:30–44Bai C, Sarkis J (2010) Integrating sustainability into supplier selection with grey system and rough set methodologies. Int J Prod Econ 124:252–264Bhagwat R, Sharma MK (2007) Performance measurement of supply chain management: a balanced scorecard approach. Comput Ind Eng 53(1):43–62Bititci US, Mendibil K, Martinez V, Albores P (2005) Measuring and managing performance in extended enterprises. Int J Oper Prod Manag 25(4):333–353Brewer PC, Speh TW (2000) Using the balanced scorecard to measure supply chain performance. J Bus Logist 21(1):75–93Bullinger HJ, Kühner M, Hoof AV (2002) Analysing supply chain performance using a balanced measurement method. Int J Prod Res 40(15):3533–3543Chan FTS (2003) Interactive selection model for supplier selection process: an analytical hierarchy process approach. Int J Prod Res 41(15):3549–3579De Boer L, Labro E, Morlacchi P (2001) A review of methods supporting supplier selection. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 7(2):75–89Degraeve Z, Labro E, Roodhooft F (2000) An evaluation of supplier selection methods from a total cost of ownership perspective. Eur J Oper Res 125(1):34–58Dobos I, Vörösmarty G (2014) Green supplier selection and evaluation using DEA-type composite indicators. Int J of Prod Econ 157(11):273–278Dou Y, Sarkis J (2010) A joint location and outsourcing sustainability analysis for a strategic offshoring decision. Int J Prod Res 48(2):567–592Dyllick T, Hockerts K (2002) Beyond the business case for corporate sustainability. Bus Strategy Environ 11:130–141Falatoonitoosi E, Leman Z, Sorooshian S (2013) Modeling for green supply chain evaluation. Math Probl Eng 2013:1–9Farzad T, Rasid OM, Aidy A, Rosnah MY, Alireza E (2008) AHP approach for supplier evaluation and selection in a steel manufacturing company. JIEM 1(2):54–76Ferreira LMDF, Silva C, Garrido Azevedo S (2016) An environmental balanced scorecard for supply chain performance measurement (Env_BSC_4_SCPM). Benchmark Int J 23(6):1398–1422Figge F, Hahn T, Schaltegger S, Wagner M (2002) The sustainability balanced scorecard: linking sustainability management to business strategy. Bus Strat Env 11:269–284Folan P, Browne J (2005) Development of an extended enterprise performance measurement system. Prod Plan Control 16(6):531–544Freeman J, Chen T (2015) Green supplier selection using an AHP-entropy-TOPSIS framework. Supply Chain Manag 20:327–340Genovese A, Koh L, Bruno G, Esposito E (2013) Greener supplier selection: state of the art and some empirical evidence. Int J Prod Res 51(10):2868–2886Ghodsypour SH, O’Brien C (1998) A decision support system for supplier selection using an integrated analytic hierarchy process and linear programming. Int J Prod Econ 56–57:199–212Glock CH, Grosse EH, Ries JM (2017) Decision support models for supplier development: systematic literature review and research agenda. Int J Prod Econ 194:246–260Govindan K, Khodaverdi R, Jafarian A (2013) A fuzzy multi criteria approach for measuring sustainability performance of a supplier based on triple bottom line approach. J Clean Prod 47:345–354Govindan K, Rajendran S, Sarkis J, Murugesan P (2015) Multi criteria decision making approaches for green supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. J Clean Prod 98:66–83Gunasekaran A, Patel C, Tirtiroglu E (2001) Performance measures and metrics in a supply chain environment. Int J Oper Prod Manag 21(1/2):71–87Ho W, Xu X, Dey PK (2010) Multi-criteria decision making approaches for supplier evaluation and selection: a literature review. Eur J Oper Res 202:16–24Hsu CW, Hu AH (2009) Applying hazardous substance management to supplier selection using analytic network process. J Clean Prod 17(2):255–264Hsu CW, Kuo TC, Chen SH, Hu AH (2013) Using DEMATEL to develop a carbon management model of supplier selection in green supply chain management. J Clean Prod 56:164–172Huan SH, Sheoran SK, Wang G (2004) A review and analysis of supply chain operations reference (SCOR) model. Supply Chain Manag Int J 9(9):23–29Hutchins M, Sutherland JH (2008) An exploration of measures of social sustainability and their application to supply chain decisions. J Clean Prod 16(15):1688–1698Igarashi M, Boer L, Magerholm Fet A (2013) What is required for greener supplier selection? A literature review and conceptual model development. J Purch Supply Manag 19(4):247–263Jimenez-Jimenez D, Martínez-Costa M, Sanchez Rodriguez C (2019) The mediating role of supply chain collaboration on the relationship between information technology and innovation. J Knowl Manag 23(3):548–567Kaplan RS, Norton DP (1992) The balanced scorecard: measures that drive performance. Harvard Bus Rev 70(1):71–79Luthra S, Govindan K, Kannan D, Kumar Mangla S, Prakash Garg C (2017) An integrated framework for sustainable supplier selection and evaluation in supply chains. J Clean Prod 140:1686–1698Maestrini V, Luzzini D, Maccarrone P, Caniato F (2017) Supply chain performance measurement systems: a systematic review and research agenda. Int J Prod Econ 183A:299–315Masella C, Rangone A (2000) A contingent approach to the design of vendor selection systems for different types of co-operative customer/supplier relationships. Int J Oper Prod Manag 20(1):70–84Miller GA (1956) The magical number seven, plus or minus two: some limits on our capacity for processing information. Psychol Rev 63:81–97Mohammed A, Harris I, Govindan K (2019) A hybrid MCDM-FMOO approach for sustainable supplier selection and order allocation. Int J Prod Econ 217:171–184Motevali-Haghighi S, Torabi SA, Ghasemi R (2016) An integrated approach for performance evaluation in sustainable supply chain networks (with a case study). J Clean Prod 137:579–597Nawaz W, Koç M (2018) Development of a systematic framework for sustainability management of organizations. J Clean Prod 171:1255–1274Nie X (2013) Green suppliers selecting based on analytic hierarchy process for biotechnology industry. In: Zhong Z (ed) Proceedings of the international conference on information engineering and applications. Springer, London, pp 253–260Nielsen IE, Banaeian N, Golińska P, Mobli H, Omid M (2014) Green supplier selection criteria: from a literature review to a flexible framework for determination of suitable criteria. In: Golinska P (ed) Logistics operations, supply chain management and sustainability. Springer, Cham, pp 79–99Noci G (1997) Designing ‘green’ vendor rating systems for the assessment of a supplier’s environmental performance. Eur J Purch Supply Manag 3(2):103–114Petersen KJ, Handfield RB, Ragatz GL (2005) Supplier integration into new product development: coordinating product, process and supply chain design. J Oper Manag 23:371–388Pishchulov G, Trautrims A, Chesney T, Gold S, Schwab L (2019) The voting analytic hierarchy process revisited: a revised method with application to sustainable supplier selection. Int J Prod Econ 211:166–179Popovic T, Kraslawski A, Barbosa-Póvoa A, Carvalho A (2017) Quantitative indicators for social sustainability assessment of society and product responsibility aspects in supply chains. J Int Stud 10(4):9–36Qorri A, Mujki Z, Kraslawski A (2018) A conceptual framework for measuring sustainability performance of supply chains. J Clean Prod 189:570–584Reefke H, Trocchi M (2013) Balanced scorecard for sustainable supply chains: design and development guidelines. Int J Prod Perform Manag 62(8):805–826Saaty TL (1980) The analytic hierarchy process. McGraw-Hill, New YorkSaaty RW (1987) The analytic hierarchy process: what it is and how it is used. Math Model 9(3–5):161–176Saaty TL (2008) Decision making with the analytic hierarchy process. Int J Serv Sci 1(1):83–98Saaty TL, Ozdemir MS (2003) Why the magic number seven plus or minus two. Math Comput Model 38(3–4):233–244Seuring S, Müller M (2008) From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. J Clean Prod 16:1699–1710Shaik M, Abdul-Kader W (2011) Green supplier selection generic framework: a multi-attribute utility theory approach. Int J Sustain Eng 4(1):37–56Shi P, Yan B, Shi S, Ke C (2015) A decision support system to select suppliers for a sustainable supply chain based on a systematic DEA approach. Inf Technol Manag 16(1):39–49Superdecisions (2018) Tutorial on hierarchical decision models. Creative Decisions Foundation. https://www.superdecisions.com/sd_resources/v28_man03.pdf. Accessed 7 Jan 2018Thakkar J, Kanda A, Deshmukh S (2009) Supply chain performance measurement framework for small and medium scale enterprises. Benchmark Int J 16(5):702–723Theißen S, Spinler S (2014) Strategic analysis of manufacturer–supplier partnerships: an ANP model for collaborative CO2 reduction management. Eur J Oper Res 233(2):383–397Tseng ML, Lim M, Wong WP (2015) Sustainable supply chain management: a closed-loop network hierarchical approach. Ind Manag Data Syst 115(3):436–461Uysal F (2012) An integrated model for sustainable performance measurement in supply chain. Proc Soc Behav Sci 62:689–694Valenzuela L, Maturana S (2016) Designing a three-dimensional performance measurement system (SMD3D) for the wine industry: a Chilean example. Agric Syst 142:112–121Verdecho MJ, Alfaro-Saiz JJ, Rodriguez-Rodriguez R, Ortiz-Bas A (2012) A multi-criteria approach for managing inter-enterprise collaborative relationships. Omega 40:249–263Virender P, Jayant A (2014) A green supplier selection model for an agriculture-machinery industry. Int J Appl Eng Res 9(5):597–605Weber CA, Current JR, Benton WC (1991) Vendor selection criteria and methods. Eur J Oper Res 50(1):2–18Xu L, Kumar DT, Madan Shankar K, Kannan D, Chen G (2013) Analyzing criteria and sub-criteria for the corporate social responsibility-based supplier selection process using AHP. Int J Adv Manuf Technol 68(1–4):907–916Xu Z, Qin J, Liu J, Martínez L (2019) Sustainable supplier selection based on AHP Sort II in interval type-2 fuzzy environment. Inf Sci 483:273–293Zaklad A, McKnight R, Kosansky A, Piermarini J (2004) The social side of the supply chain. Ind Eng 36(2):40–44Zhe S, Wong NT, Lee LH (2013) Using data envelopment analysis for supplier evaluation with environmental considerations. In: International systems conference, OrlandoZimmer K, Fröhling M, Schultmann F (2016) Sustainable supplier management: a review of models supporting sustainable supplier selection, monitoring and development. Int J Prod Res 54(5):1412–144

Improving sustainability performance through supplier relationship management in the tobacco industry

Purpose: The purpose of this study is to explore how tobacco manufacturing companies can improve their sustainability performance via effective supplier relationship management (SRM). Design/methodology/approach: This study has adopted a single case study of an international tobacco company. The primary data involved semi-structured interviews with participants from the case company who are familiar with sustainable SRM in the tobacco industry and are engaging in various techniques to improve sustainability performance. Findings: The drivers for sustainable SRM commonly identified in literature are observable within the case company. There is also clear evidence of integrating sustainability in its SRM processes. However, the perception of sustainability as a requirement to meet stringent regulations limits its scope and drive in pursuing sustainable SRM. It has also limited supplier sustainability evaluation and performance metrics. Furthermore, the findings of this paper reinforce the importance of a procurement team’s ability to work with other functional teams in implementing sustainable SRM. The findings also contribute to the emerging literature on the impact of sustainability on supplier segmentation and multi-tier supplier management. Research limitations/implications: This study provides insight into the varying SRM methods used in the tobacco industry to ensure compliance and improve sustainability performance. However, further research is required to explore the generalisability of the findings of this study derived from a single case study. Originality/value: The tobacco industry is an under-researched industry, particularly in terms of sustainable operations and supply chain management practices. The findings of this study seem to be relevant to those comparable industries with stringent regulations as well

Compliance is Not Enough: Best Practices in Responding to The California Transparency in Supply Chains Act

This document is part of a digital collection provided by the Martin P. Catherwood Library, ILR School, Cornell University, pertaining to the effects of globalization on the workplace worldwide. Special emphasis is placed on labor rights, working conditions, labor market changes, and union organizing.V_2012_Compliance_Not_Enough_California_Transparency_Supply_Chain_WP.pdf: 824 downloads, before Oct. 1, 2020

Implementing sustainability in multi-tier supply chains: strategies and contingencies in managing sub-suppliers

Buying firms must pay increased attention to supply chain sustainability issues, as stakeholders might hold them responsible for non-sustainable supply chain activities. Frequently, sustainability problems occur upstream at the sub-supplier level. Building on the literature on multi-tier supply chains (MSCs), we investigated the sustainability management strategies of buying firms in the food, apparel, packaging, and consumer electronics with regard to second-tier suppliers and beyond. In particular, we analyzed seven cases of global MSCs and found four different characteristic MSC types—open, closed, third party, and “don't bother”. We identified three main factors—supply chain complexity, the sustainability management capabilities of the first-tier supplier, and the type of sustainability in focus (i.e., environmental or social sustainability)—that determine when and how buying firms actually extend their sustainability strategies to their sub-suppliers

Embedding sustainability into global supply chains : evidence from Bangladeshi multi-tier apparel suppliers : a thesis presented in partial fulfilment of the requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Management at Massey University, Albany, Auckland, New Zealand

Sustainability and supply management in global supply chains (GSCs) have received much attention over the recent years from industry leaders, academics, and policy makers worldwide. However, scant attention has been paid to investigating the implementation of sustainable supply management (SSM) practices from the perspective of multi-tier suppliers located in a developing country context. To address this knowledge gap, this study examines why and how Bangladeshi multi-tier apparel suppliers implement SSM practices in GSCs. This study is positioned within an interpretivist paradigm and employs qualitative research methodology, drawing on data from interviews with 7 owners and 39 managers of Bangladeshi multi-tier apparel suppliers and their 15 key stakeholders. This thesis contains three empirical findings chapters. The first chapter investigates the factors that drive or hinder multi-tier suppliers’ implementation of SSM practices, drawing on integrative stakeholder theory, institutional theory and contingency theory. The findings suggest that buyers’ requirements, increased factory productivity and external stakeholder expectations are key drivers for multi-tier suppliers to embed SSM practices. Conversely, cost and resource concerns, and gaps in the regulatory framework are dominant barriers encountered by multi-tier suppliers in the effective implementation of SSM practices. The second chapter examines how institutional pressures and mechanisms affect the implementation of SSM practices across multi-tier suppliers, and why these suppliers decouple implementation practices. Drawing on institutional theory, the findings indicate that institutional pressures and mechanisms – coercive, mimetic and normative – vary across multi-tier suppliers, thereby affecting their divergent implementation of SSM practices. However, managers and owners of multi-tier suppliers apply three key decoupling approaches – avoidance, defiance and manipulation – in response to institutional pressures. Specifically, the findings suggest a multiplicity of logics across multi-tier suppliers, which conflict with or complement each other during the SSM implementation process. The third chapter investigates how multi-tier apparel suppliers integrate social and environmental issues to improve SSM outcomes. The findings suggest that multi-tier apparel suppliers are implementing various social and environmental practices to improve SSM outcomes. Although the level of implementation of sustainability practices is high within first-tier suppliers, second-tier and third-tier suppliers either adopt specific social practices on an ad hoc basis or symbolically implement environmental practices. Reflecting on the overall findings, this study contributes to theory by offering a series of research propositions and expounding a holistic SSM implementation framework for multi-tier suppliers. In addition, this study provides significant implications for practitioners including factory owners, managers, and policy makers who seek to implement SSM practices in GSCs. The key limitation of this study concerns generalisability due to context-specific challenges. Future research should therefore focus on a cross-country data set to understand any differences in the emerging framework for multi-tier suppliers’ SSM implementation

Developing an Artificial Intelligence Framework to Assess Shipbuilding and Repair Sub-Tier Supply Chains Risk

The defense shipbuilding and repair industry is a labor-intensive sector that can be characterized by low-product volumes and high investments in which a large number of shared resources, technology, suppliers, and processes asynchronously converge into large construction projects. It is mainly organized by the execution of a complex combination of sequential and overlapping stages. While entities engaged in this large-scale endeavor are often knowledgeable about their first-tier suppliers, they usually do not have insight into the lower tiers suppliers. A sizable part of any supply chain disruption is attributable to instabilities in sub-tier suppliers. This research note conceptually delineates a framework that considers the elicitation of the existing associations between suppliers and sub-tier suppliers. This framework, Shipbuilding Risk Supply Chain (Ship-RISC), offers a simulation framework to leverage real-time and data using an Industry 4.0 approach to generate descriptive and prescriptive analytics based on the execution of simulation models that support risk management assessment and decision-making

The complementing role of sustainability standards in managing international and multi-tiered mineral supply chains

Abstract Supply chains (SCs) often entail suppliers beyond the focal firm's visible horizon and thus outside its awareness and management. This article conceptualizes how standards can complement the management of complex SCs to identify and manage previously unknown suppliers. Combining institutional theory and multi-tier SC management (SCM), standards and SCs are conceptualized as meta-institutional fields that can complement each other to enlarge the reach of the focal firm, reduce SC uncertainty, and ensure legitimate SC operations. This conceptualization is empirically supported with 1) a pre-study of eight interviews with large firms in the automotive industry and 2) a structured content-analysis based document analysis of twenty sustainability standards for mineral resources. The findings identify a standard's ownership, its supplier coverage, and the overlap of its requirements with institutionalized SC values, structures, and practices as critical enablers for establishing supplier compliance in complex and previously unmanaged settings, such as the upstream parts of international and multi-tiered mineral SCs. Based on these findings, focal firms can use standards to enhance the reach and power towards distant suppliers. The reviewed standards could extend their supplier coverage and focus sustainability at large to create synergies for their downstream customers. The study thus contributes a novel conceptualization of the complementing role of standards in SCs and especially beyond the visible horizon of the focal firm, refines the constructs for a standard's characterization in SCM, and provides first industry-specific empirical support for the relevance of the complementing role and how standards currently fill it

Challenges in collecting sustainability information in Multi-Tier Supply Chains : Impact of EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence directive

Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) is becoming increasingly important to companies. The literature has acknowledged that multi-tier supply chains can have a positive impact on sustainability but expanding the scope of SSCM is challenging as it e.g., decreases management efficiency because of information exchange difficulties and because of the restricted observability of supply chain partners. Stakeholders are extensively requiring the companies to extend their sustainability management practices to the entire, complex multi-tiered supply chains and the proposal of the EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence (CSDD) directive is a novel example of that. To answer to the requirements of stakeholders and the directive, firms must collect sustainability information from their supply chains, hence are facing several challenges related to multi-tier sustainable supply chain management (MT-SSCM), transparency and due diligence. The purpose of this study is to find out what kind of challenges do companies face in collecting sustainability information in multi-tier supply chains and whether the new EU CSDD would bring any additional challenges to them. The aim of the research is also to see if the industry, the existing regulation affecting sourcing, or the company’s perceived maturity of sustainability management influence the challenges companies face. The research approach for this study is qualitative. Four semi-structured interviews were conducted in companies included in the EU CSDD scope and analysed using thematic analysis. The findings of this research indicate that the challenges companies see emerge mainly from supply chain complexity, which brings challenges, such as lack of power, distance, and lack of visibility, that subsequently influence supplier resistance, transparency, company resources and information gathering. Challenges emerging from the EU CSDD are mainly related to the content of the directive and the extra resources needed for complying with the regulation. The nature of the industry where the company operates, regulation and the company’s subjective perception of their sustainability management maturity affect how challenging companies saw answering to the directive. This research concludes that MT-SSCM, transparency and due diligence literature are closely interlinked and that the challenges in collecting sustainability information affect the success in all the three areas. This study fills in the gap on MT-SSCM literature and is especially concentrating on the relations of transparency and due diligence to MT-SSCM. It is also novel research of the challenges emerging especially from EU CSDD. This study provides business leaders understanding of where the challenges are stemming from and helps them to navigate in the dynamic world of changing sustainability requirements. This study also gives suggestions for policy makers on how to build better regulation.Vastuullinen toimitusketjujen hallinta (sustainable supply chain management, SSCM) on yhä tärkeämpää yrityksille. Multi-tier -toimitusketjujen positiivinen vaikutus toimitusketjun kestävyyteen on huomattu myös kirjallisuudessa, mutta SSCM:n soveltamisen laajentaminen pidemmälle toimitusketjuun on haastavaa, sillä esimerkiksi vaikeudet tiedonvaihdossa heikentävät hallinnoinnin tehokkuutta ja näkyvyys toimitusketjun ylävirran toimijoihin on huonontunut. Sidosryhmät vaativat enenevissä määrin yrityksiä laajentamaan vastuullisuuden hallintaa koko monimutkaisiin multi-tier -toimitusketjuihin, ja EU:n yritysten kestävää toimintaa koskeva huolellisuusvelvoite (EU Corporate Sustainability Due Diligence, CSDD) -direktiiviehdotus on tuorein esimerkki tästä. Vastatakseen sidosryhmien ja direktiivin vaatimuksiin yritysten on kerättävä toimitusketjujensa vastuullisuustietoa, mikä tarkoittaa niille useita multi-tier -toimitusketjun hallintaan, läpinäkyvyyteen ja due diligencen suorittamiseen liittyviä haasteita. Tämän tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on selvittää, millaisia haasteita vastuullisuustiedon kerääminen multi-tier -toimitusketjuista aiheuttaa yrityksille ja millaisia lisähaasteita he näkevät EU:n CSDD:n heille tuovan. Tutkimuksen tarkoituksena on myös selvittää, vaikuttaako toimiala, hankintaan vaikuttava olemassa oleva sääntely tai yrityksen näkemys omasta vastuullisuuden hallinnan edistyksellisyydestä yritysten kohtaamiin haasteisiin. Tässä tutkimuksessa on käytetty kvalitatiivista tutkimusotetta. Neljä EU:n CSDD:n soveltamisalaan kuuluvaa yritystä haastateltiin ja tulokset analysoitiin teemoittelulla. Haastattelut olivat puolistrukturoituja. Tämän tutkimuksen tulokset osoittavat, että yritysten näkemät haasteet johtuvat pääasiassa toimitusketjun monimutkaisuudesta, joka luo haasteita, jotka liittyvät neuvotteluvaltaan, etäisyyteen ja näkyvyyden puutteeseen, jotka edelleen vaikuttavat toimittajien luomaan vastarintaan, läpinäkyvyyteen, yrityksen resursseihin ja tiedonkeruuseen. EU:n CSDD:n luomat haasteet liittyvät direktiivin sisältöön ja asetuksen noudattamisen edellyttämiin lisäresursseihin yrityksiltä. Yrityksen toimialan luonne, sääntely ja yrityksen subjektiivinen näkemys vastuullisuuden hallinnan edistyksellisyydestä vaikuttavat siihen, kuinka haasteellisena yritykset näkivät direktiivin noudattamisen. Tutkimus osoittaa, että multi-tier -toimitusketjun vastuullisen johtamiseen (MT-SSCM), läpinäkyvyyteen ja due diligenceen liittyvä kirjallisuus liittyvät läheisesti toisiinsa. Se osoittaa myös, että vastuullisuustiedon keräämisen haasteet vaikuttavat kaikkien kolmen osa-alueen tavoitteiden onnistumiseen. Tämä tutkimus pyrkii täyttämään vajeen MT-SSCM -kirjallisuudessa ja keskittyy erityisesti läpinäkyvyyden ja due diligencen vaikutuksiin MT-SSCM:n toteuttamisessa. Se luo myös uutta tutkimusta erityisesti EU:n CSDD:n nouseviin haasteisiin liittyen. Tämä tutkimus antaa yritysjohtajille ymmärrystä siitä, mistä haasteet johtuvat, ja auttaa heitä navigoimaan muuttuvien vastuullisuusvaatimusten maailmassa. Tämä tutkimus antaa myös ehdotuksia poliittisille päättäjille paremman sääntelyn rakentamiseksi