The other side of the coin: advancing sustainability in the supply chain from a small supplier's standpoint

In recent years, increased attention has been devoted to exploring how sustainability practices can be implemented in supply chains and networks. Much of the operations management literature in this area has mainly focused on the large buying firms perspective, looking at how they devise standards and push suppliers to comply with them. Little has been done to uncover how small and medium size (SME) suppliers react to and cope with increasing sustainability requirements with limited capabilities in hand. This paper is an attempt to fill this gap and initiate conceptual thinking from a suppliers perspective. Qualitative insights from case studies of both developing and developed countries suppliers are offered. We draw on the sensemaking literature and propose the concept of "sustainability dissonance" to conceptualise the situation of uncertainty and ambiguity that SME suppliers are confronted to when facing multiplying sustainability requirements. A number of propositions are articulated related to suppliers interpretations and reactions when dealing with "sustainability dissonance". The article sets out a number of avenues for future research

Future business and the role of purchasing and supply management:Opportunities for ‘business-not-as-usual’ PSM research

The raison d'être for this article is simple: traditional ways of researching, theorizing, and practicing purchasing and supply management (PSM) are no longer sufficient to ‘meet the moment’. Scholars need to advance a “business-not-as-usual” footing approach to their work, if they are to make a meaningful contribution to addressing the current and future emergencies, as highlighted by recent extreme weather and the COVID-19 pandemic. Yet, what can this, or should this, mean for a field rooted in traditional business thinking? This article builds on the Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management's (JPSM) 25th Anniversary Special Issue editorial (2019); members of the JPSM's editorial team advance their unique perspectives on what “business-not-as-usual” means for PSM. Specifically, we advocate both thinking much more widely, in scope and ambition, than we currently do, and simultaneously building our ability to comprehend supply chains in a more nuanced and granular way. We explore whether the bias toward positivist work has omitted potentially interesting findings, and viewpoints. This leads to a call to re-think how we approach our work: should the key criteria always be to focus on theory development or testing? Should academics “think bigger”? Turning to specific research themes, illustrations of how our current thinking can be challenged or broadened by addressing the circular economy, and role of purchasing and innovation. Specifically, the focus on the PSM function as an intrapreneur within the larger organization, and the role of innovation and technology in PSM work. Taken together, we hope the ideas and arguments presented here will inform and inspire ambitious and novel approaches to PSM research with significant and enduring impact on the transformation of business

Manufacturing Postponement: reducing upstream vulnerability by means of an improved flexibility

As supply chain vulnerabilities and the dependence of companies to their parents (i.e., suppliers) intensify, companies are adopting manufacturing postponement in order to reduce potential negative effects of supply risks. Indeed, manufacturing postponement allows firms to properly manage point of differentiations along their production lines, improving companies' reactions capabilities. This study built a framework that relates the adoptions of postponement underlying tactics (i.e., product modularity and process re-sequencing) to the development of flexibility and to the achievement of competitive advantage (i.e., reduced exposition to supply risks). Based on data collected from 54 Italian manufacturing companies we show that the adoption of manufacturing postponement directly influence firms' resiliency. Furthermore, we show that this relationship can be partially explained by an indirect path through flexibility.manufacturing postponement; Upstream vulnerability; flexibility; supply risk;

An empirical examination of the relationship between globalization, integration and sustainable innovation within manufacturing networks

Purpose While controlling for supply chain effects, the purpose of this paper is to investigate if globalization and collaborative integration within a firm-wide manufacturing network have significant implications for the adoption of sustainable production (SP) and sustainable sourcing (SS) practices at the plant level. Design/methodology/approach The authors conceptualize SP and SS as process innovations with moderate degrees of innovativeness and apply “Organizational integration and process innovation” theory to build our conceptual model. Then, the authors use primary survey data from 471 assembly manufacturing plants operating in the US, Europe and Asia to test our hypotheses rigorously. Findings This research finds that the adoption of SP practices at the plant level is significantly and positively associated with globalization and integration of the firm-wide manufacturing network. On the contrary, the adoption of SS practices is more strongly affected by integration in the external supply chain and benefits from the manufacturing network only indirectly, through the association with SP practices. Originality/value Operations management literature devoted to sustainability has studied sustainable practices mostly from a risk management angle. Also, there exists contrasting evidence in the operations strategy literature about the positive and negative effects that globalization of a manufacturing network may have on the adoption of sustainable practices at the plant level. Moreover, several studies show how integration with supply chain partners helps manufacturing plants transition into more SP and SS practices; however, related literatures have neglected that collaborative integration within a firm-wide manufacturing network may also help to develop, or adapt to, new sustainable practices. This research represents a first attempt to resolve discordance and unveil the positive effects that manufacturing networks may have on sustainable innovations at the plant level

Sustainable evaluation and verification in supply chains: aligning and leveraging accountability to stakeholders

AbstractManagers are being challenged by multiple (and diverse) stakeholders, which have variety of expectations and informational needs about their firm's supply chains. Collectively, these expectations and needs form a multi‐faceted view of stakeholder accountability, namely the extent to which a firm justifies behaviors and actions across its extended supply chain to stakeholders. To date, sustainable supply chain management research has largely focused on monitoring as a self‐managed set of narrowly defined evaluative activities employed by firms to provide stakeholder accountability. Nevertheless, evidence is emerging that firms have developed a wide variety of monitoring systems in order to align with stakeholders' expectations and leverage accountability to stakeholders. Drawing from the accounting literature, we synthesize a model that proposes how firms might address accountability for sustainability issues in their supply chain. At its core, the construct of sustainable evaluation and verification (SEV) captures three interrelated dimensions: inclusivity, scope, and disclosure. These dimensions characterize how supply chain processes might identify key measures, collect and process data, and finally, verify materiality, reliability and accuracy of any data and resulting information. As a result, the concept of monitoring is significantly extended, while also considering how different stakeholders can play diverse, active roles as metrics are established, audits are conducted, and information is validated. Also, several antecedents of SEV systems are explored. Finally, the means by which an SEV system can create a competitive advantage are investigated

Exploration and exploitation within supply networks: Examining purchasing ambidexterity and its multiple performance implications

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to introduce and define the concept of purchasing ambidexterity in terms of two dimensions: balance dimension and combined dimension. The study proceeds to empirically examine the multiple performance effects generated for the buying firm and its key suppliers. Design/methodology/approach: Ambidexterity theory informs the authors’ conceptual model. To test the hypotheses, the authors collected survey data from 95 purchasing functions of medium and large European firms and applied various estimation techniques. Findings: This research indicates that ambidexterity substantially varies across purchasing functions. Further, it discovers that a purchasing function’s ability to advance the combined magnitude of exploratory and exploitative activities represents an essential determinant of supplier efficiency, supplier product innovation, and buyer financial performance. Notably, this research also discovers that balancing the magnitudes of exploratory and exploitative activities on a relative basis produces negative effects on the innovativeness of the supply network. Originality/value: Although ambidexterity theory has been applied to supply chain management, limited attention has been dedicated to purchasing ambidexterity. This gap led us to study how purchasing impacts the competitiveness of the buying firm and of its supply network by balancing and combining exploratory and exploitative activities. This research is the first to advance the notion of purchasing ambidexterity, unpack its underlying dimensions, and examine its multiple performance implications. Such a conceptual and empirical development presents new perspectives on how purchasing can help the buying firm and its supply network to strengthen their competitiveness

Product and process modularity: improving flexibility and reducing the supplier failure risk

As dependence on suppliers intensifies, companies can adopt product and process modularity to reduce the potential negative effects of supply disruptions. Indeed, enabling manufacturing postponement can provide firms with a prompt response; by reducing the complexity of the system and allowing for easier configuration of the production process, the negative impact of a supply disruption, such as supplier failure, can be absorbed. This study provides a framework that relates the adoption of postponement enablers (i.e., product modularity and process modularity) to the reduction of the negative impact of a supply disruption. We attempt to determine whether the direct effect can be explained by the impact of these practices on companies’ flexibility. Based on data collected from 54 Italian manufacturing companies, we show that the adoption of manufacturing postponement enablers directly reduces the negative impact of the occurrence of supplier failure. Furthermore, we show that this relationship can only be partially explained by an indirect path through companies’ flexibility