Suchergebnisse

UK legislation, in the form of the Public Services (Social Value) Act 2012 (hereafter SVA) and more recently the Modern Slavery Act 2015 (hereafter MSA) has begun to acknowledge the role public procurement can play in improving social sustainability. Specifically in its response to an independent review, in July 2019 the UK Government agreed that it should be subject to the same MSA transparency in supply chains requirements as businesses and that, following consultation, certain other public-sector organisations may also be required to produce an annual statement in accordance with MSA Section 54. 1 We use data from a case study of one English Local Authority (hereafter LA) to identify four types of modern slavery risk in the labour supply chains of its adult social care services: debt bondage; remuneration; recruitment and selection and occupational risk. We discuss how the theoretical model proposed by Gold, Trodd and Trautrims may be used to identify the detection and remediation capabilities required to reduce these risks and discuss some of the barriers that need to be overcome if LAs are to design legally compliant procedures.

PurposeIt has been suggested that "customer responsive supply‐chain management" and "agile supply‐chain management" are necessary for the new competitive conditions. However, there is an enormous gap between the idealised prescription and actual practice. The aim of this paper is to examine, in some detail, the factors that can help to explain this mismatch between rhetoric and reality.Design/methodology/approachTo do so, it focuses on a "best‐case" situation – the retailer Marks and Spencer and its relations with its clothing suppliers. This company has traditionally been renowned, among other things, for the sophistication of its supply‐chain activities. The research reported here is based on detailed interviews with suppliers and buyers.FindingsThe research reveals that the tenets of the customer responsive supply‐chain management model are technically feasible. But, the study also finds that even under circumstances where there is evidence that it works well, and produces valued outcomes, it remains vulnerable to erosion because of a number of institutional factors.Research limitations/implicationsThe research presents a number of challenges to conventional thinking about collaborative relationships. The paper suggests the need for further work on the competing priorities between collaborative inter‐organisational working on the one hand, and competing corporate strategies and ingrained routines on the other.Practical implicationsPractitioners can derive many lessons from this research – most notably it identifies the nature of the barriers and forearms supply‐chain innovators with details of the dynamics that can so easily thwart their best efforts.Originality/valueThe paper explains the mismatch between rhetonic and reality in buyer‐seller relationships.

AbstractThe United Kingdom's Modern Slavery Act exposed companies to a new ethical challenge in their supply chains. An estimated 40.3 million people worldwide are in modern slavery, working in a range of supply chains, including construction and facilities management. In this article, we show how the UK construction and facilities management sector responded to this challenge through an intra‐industry initiative and went through a process of collaborative sense‐making and sector‐wide agreement on a joint approach to challenge modern slavery in the sector's operations and supply chains. The research takes an engaged research approach whereby the researchers have been able to gain deep and continued access to the phenomenon from participation in a multi‐company initiative on the implementation of responses to the UK Modern Slavery Act in supply chain and procurement activities of their sector. We identify and discuss key areas for supply chain and procurement practitioners tasked with addressing a human rights topic in their operations and supply chains: Motivation, risk hot‐spots, challenges and response and provide a rich understanding of an intra‐industry initiative which creates a basis for further research on collective sustainability approaches by businesses who are otherwise commercial competitors. The study's results and insights are useful for policymakers and practitioners who are aiming to apply market‐based approaches for sustainability improvements in supply chains.

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to critically assess current developments in the theory and practice of supply management and through such an assessment to identify barriers, possibilities and key trends.Design/methodology/approachThe paper is based on a three‐year detailed study of six supply chains which encompassed 72 companies in Europe. The focal firms in each instance were sophisticated, blue‐chip corporations operating on an international scale. Managers across at least four echelons of the supply chain were interviewed and the supply chains were traced and observed.FindingsThe paper reveals that supply management is, at best, still emergent in terms of both theory and practice. Few practitioners were able – or even seriously aspired – to extend their reach across the supply chain in the manner prescribed in much modern theory. The paper identifies the range of key barriers and enablers to supply management and it concludes with an assessment of the main trends.Research limitations/implicationsThe research presents a number of challenges to existing thinking about supply strategy and supply chain management. It reveals the substantial gaps between theory and practice. A number of trends are identified which it is argued may work in favour of better prospects for SCM in the future and for the future of supply management as a discipline.Practical implicationsA central challenge concerns who could or should manage the supply chain. Barriers to effective supply management are identified and some practical steps to surmount them are suggested.Originality/valueThe paper is original in the way in which it draws on an extensive systematic study to critically assess current theory and current developments. The paper points the way for theorists and practitioners to meet future challenges.