Search results

PurposeA firm's ability to cascade sustainability requirements further down to lower-tier suppliers might be affected by inter-firm power relations. This study aimed to identify the power sources of focal firms and first- and lower-tier suppliers and to investigate how they may affect their ability to cascade sustainability requirements along multi-tier supply chains.Design/methodology/approachA multiple case study of 24 companies was conducted to investigate the sources of power in multi-tier supply chains. In total, 42 informants from five focal companies, ten first-tier suppliers and nine lower-tier suppliers were interviewed.FindingsDifferences were found between the sources from which focal firms and first- and lower-tier suppliers drew power. Findings revealed that firms' power sources may increase or impair their ability to cascade sustainability requirements to lower supply chain tiers. Furthermore, multi-tier supply chain-level power sources constitute a significant determinant of firms' ability to disseminate sustainability requirements to lower-tier suppliers.Practical implicationsThe results can help companies and purchasing managers understand how their own and suppliers' power may affect their ability to cascade sustainability agendas to lower-tier suppliers. In particular, the results can be useful for supplier selection and the development of supplier relationship management strategies for fostering sustainability in multi-tier supply chains.Originality/valueThis study places traditional power perspectives in the context of multi-tier sustainable supply chain management, broadening the view beyond dyadic relationships that have traditionally been the focus of the supply management literature.

Purpose
The purpose of this paper is to examine the dimensions of supply management that may contribute to its ability to create value. Based on previous literature, this study proposes that key supplier management (KSM), the strategic level of supply management and supplier relationship management (SRM) capabilities can be supply management factors that significantly influence its ability to create value.


Design/methodology/approach
The issue is examined using survey data collected in Finland, and the concepts are tested using regression analysis.


Findings
The results show that KSM, the strategic level of supply management and SRM capabilities are significant dimensions of value creation in supply management. The findings support the contemporary understanding of value in which firms endeavour to create value for the company, its customers and its suppliers.


Originality/value
Previously, value creation has received minor attention in supply chain management research. Although previous research clearly shows that strategic supply management plays a significant role in firms' competitiveness and performance, its role and potential in value creation have been less studied. Thus, this study contributes by empirically examining the factors affecting the ability of a firm's supply management to create value.

AbstractThis paper highlights the role of green supply management in the development of a sustainable supply chain. It examines if supply risks, supplier relationship management capability, and end‐customer orientation of supply management function are connected to the green supply management practices of a firm. These connections are studied using a survey data of 165 firms collected in Finland. The results of regression analysis show that the protection of a firm's reputation is highly related to the level of green supply management; consumer awareness of green requirements puts strong pressure on a firm's supply management to meet the end‐customers' expectations, and the high the level of supplier relationship management capability in firms increases the adoption of green supply management. Furthermore, it finds that larger firms exploit green supply management practices more than the smaller ones, and green purchasing activities are not applied in high‐volume‐buying Finnish companies. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and ERP Environment

Purpose
Due to the increasing complexity in supply chains and networks, several key practices have been highlighted as beneficial for supply chain performance. However, it is less known whether adopting such practices affects the innovation performance of the focal firm. This study hypothesises that supplier collaboration practices in four specific areas (green and ethical supply management, early supplier involvement, systemic purchasing and inter-firm learning) may lead to higher focal firm innovation performance, as they require the firm to adopt new business models, processes and product features.


Design/methodology/approach
The hypotheses drawn from previous research are tested with a quantitative survey study of 165 Finnish firms and analysed by means of regression analysis.


Findings
The results show that two examined practices are positively related to focal firm innovation performance: systemic purchasing and green and ethical supply management. Interestingly, early supplier involvement and inter-firm learning did not influence innovation performance.


Originality/value
Little is known about whether adopting certain practices in supply management affects the innovation performance of the firm. In fact, among the performance indicators of supply management, innovation is rarely studied, and more studies using innovation as a performance indicator are called for. Thus, this study focuses on supplier collaboration practices and their relation to the focal firm's innovation performance.

PurposeManaging supply chains (SCs) for sustainability often results in conflicting demands, which can be conceptualized as sustainability tensions. This paper studies sustainability tensions in electronics SC contexts and the related management responses by applying a paradox perspective.Design/methodology/approachA single case study on the electronics SC is conducted with companies and third-party organizations as embedded units of analysis, using semi-structured interviews that are triangulated with publicly available data.FindingsThe study identifies tension elements (learning, belonging, organizing and economic performing) conflicting with general social–ecological objectives in the electronics SC. The results indicate a hierarchal structure among the sustainability tensions in SC contexts. The management responses of contextualization and resolution are assigned to the identified tensions.Practical implicationsFraming social–ecological objectives with their conflicting elements as paradoxical tensions enables organizations and SCs to develop better strategies for responding to complex sustainability issues in SC contexts.Originality/valueThe study contributes toward filling the gap on paradoxical sustainability tensions in SCs. Empirical insights are gained from different actors in the electronics SC. The level of emergence and interconnectedness of sustainability tensions in a larger SC context is explored through an outside-in perspective.