Upstream complex power relationships and firm’s reputation in global value chains
Introduction
In recent times, sustainability and ethics-related issues have been gaining attention among stakeholders, particularly firms are faced with challenges in ensuring the adoption of sustainable and ethical principles along an entire supply chain comprising numerous individual entities that influence one another's reputation and performance (Klassen and Vereecke, 2012; de Sousa Jabbour et al., 2019). There have been instances of unethical practices in upstream supply chains that have caused tremendous damage to the reputation of the relevant focal firm (Ehrgott et al., 2011; Goebel et al., 2012; Klassen and Vereecke, 2012; Mani and Gunasekaran, 2018; Mangla et al., 2018). For instance, unethical practices in suppliers including food contamination, dangerous chemicals used in children's toys, faulty automobile design and subsequent recall have caused huge financial losses and damaged focal companies' reputations (Roth et al., 2008).
Additionally, McDonalds faced severe criticism and consumer backlash in China for serving expired meat in its restaurants, meat which was procured from one of its suppliers (LA Times 2014). Other recent examples also show how the reputation of focal companies can be damaged by social and environmental problems originating in the distant reaches of their supply chains, such as the collapse of the Rana Plaza garment factory in Bangladesh in 2013 (Hoskins, 2016), Mattel's recall of toys due to the wrongdoing of a third-party supplier in China (Dou et al., 2018) or the Foxconn-Apple issue concerning workplace conditions in Asia (van Heerden 2012).
Early definitions of ethical responsibility proved to be contradictory. Scholars have not fully agreed on the distinction between the terms ‘social responsibility’ and ‘business ethics’, and often use them interchangeably (Beauchamp and Bowie 2001; Carter 2000). Carroll (1979) suggests that ethical responsibilities are encompassed within the broader area of social responsibility. In the supply chain literature, thus enriching the definition of Carter (2000), and Eltantawy et al. (2009), supply chain ethical responsibility refers to supplier's ability to produce and supply high quality components or services, value for money materials in a fair, reasonable and consistent manner that meets and exceeds societal norms (Eltantawy et al., 2009). This definition implies the need for products and services that are ethically responsible and accepted by all users.
The biggest dilemma with which corporations are faced is how they can produce goods and services which are socially responsible without compromising their financial goals (e.g., outsourcing to low-cost nations in order to reduce production costs). At the same time, over the past decade supply chain managers have begun to recognize ethically responsible practices, policies and their potential benefits for supply chain performance, and this trend has been bolstered by the growing body of studies that describe the link between ethical responsibility and performance benefits (Carter, 2000; Maloni and Brown, 2006; Eltantawy et al., 2009; Kamble et al., 2019) Further, studies have identified benefits of ethically responsible practices in supply chains' and focal firms’ cost performance (Pullman et al., 2009) and reputation (Eltantawy et al., 2009; Ehrgott et al., 2011).
However, management of unethical supply chain practices has been a major challenge for corporations in emerging economies due to different institutional dynamics. On the other hand, many firms have developed strategies that extend their established governance processes to their supply chain partners. One such mechanism is the implementation of supplier codes of conduct (Jiang, 2009; Gimenez and Sierra, 2013; Clarke and Boersma, 2017). Other mechanisms include supplier selection, supplier development and supplier integration, through which firms aim to minimize ethical concerns arising from their network partners (Goebel et al., 2012; Gimenez and Sierra, 2013; Yadlapalli et al., 2018).
Other strategic motivations for focal companies include supplier management for risk mitigation and performance benefits, and supplier management for sustainable and socially acceptable products (Seuring and Muller, 2008). The first of these motivations is driven by fear of reputational damage due to sustainability related issues, while the second aims to develop life cycle-based standards in the supply chain to improve the social and environmental performance of products (Seuring and Muller, 2008; Savino et al., 2015). The two strategies are complementary. Although the underlying presumption is that firms can no longer enjoy the luxury of ignoring unethical practices as such practices affect their reputation, there is a lack of holistic, theory-driven empirical investigations of ethical issues through governance mechanisms and their performance benefits (Eltantawy et al., 2009; Gimenez and Sierra, 2013).
On the other hand, the global value chain perspective (GVCP) is considered an appropriate approach to examine the relationship between upstream supply chain network partners and the benefits they bring to downstream members of the supply chain (Gereffi and Lee, 2016; Gereffi and Fernandez-Stark, 2016). The advantage of the global value chain approach is that the impact of both upstream and downstream events is taken into account (van Dijk and Trienekens, 2012). GVCP also insists that value must be created not just for shareholders but also for all stakeholders. GVCP focuses on network governance systems, the transaction aspects that were subject to coordination and control, and practical approach to governance process. According to Humphrey (2014) GVC theory is the intermediate forms of governance- “without ownership how control can be exercised in chains where performance of one entity in the chain has significant consequences for others in other parts of the chain”. This distinctive characteristics of GVC theory make it particularly relevant to the analysis of how firms might address sustainability issues and in more, how sustainability standards impact chain governance.
The important benefit of value chain governance is to reduce the governance cost. While it reduces cost for buyers through prescriptive standards scheme, the supplier enjoys the benefit of economies of scale in design, management and reputation building (Humphrey, 2014) (Detailed discussion on GVCP can be found in section 2.1). On the other hand, transaction cost perspective focuses on cost efficiency which can be accomplished by efficient transactions and governing structures. TCP postulates that the transaction cost is depending on three aspects: the overall enterprise structure; the activities that the company can perform internally, and the activities outsourced; and defining the efficient boundaries (governing mechanism's) (Williamson, 1981). As both GVCP and transaction cost perspective provide guidance in governance mechanisms, and reduction in transaction cost in global value chains, are said to be complimentary. Although there are studies in the literature examining supply chain governance mechanisms and related benefits, research examining these relationships using a global value chain perspective is scant (Gimenez and Sierra, 2013; Yadlapalli et al., 2018) Additionally, such studies examine either environmental or social issues in a standalone fashion, using a transaction cost or agency mechanism perspective and suggesting a global value chain perspective for future research (Gereffi and Lee, 2016). Furthermore, the available studies' contributions are limited in their potential benefits to either supply chains or focal companies.
Additionally, governance mechanisms in relation to ethical issues are only emerging in the research so far. This study examines empirical evidence from one of the largest poultry manufacturing industries in India. This is due to important reasons as follows: India has exported 659304 MT poultry products for the worth of USD 4.1 Billion in 2017-18, majority accounts for Middle east, Vietnam, Egypt, Indonesia and 5000 MT into Europe including Germany and Netherland(Food processing India report, 2018). In India, per capita consumption of poultry (chicken) has gone up from 400 g to 2.5 kg/annum over last five years. This is primarily due to growing young population and their quality consciousness, especially on good and healthy food. However, poultry industry is plagued with severe problems including supplier's low standards, resulting in low productivity, lack of quality standards including excessive use of antibiotics, potentially threatening not only exports but also domestic consumption due to consumers backlash (CSE Report, 2018). This study is relevant because it addresses ethical and sustainability issues through effective governing mechanism's that is still scant in the literature.
In order to address this theoretical void, our research aims to address important research questions: What is the effect of upstream value chain governance mechanisms in relation to ethical issues? To what extent do governance mechanisms impact supply chain performance and reputation? Thus, our contributions are twofold: First, by applying the theoretical lens of the global value chain perspective we examine the effectiveness of upstream supply chain governance mechanisms specifically in global food supply chains, thereby contributing to the development of theory in the supply chain literature. Second, we contribute to the development of upstream supply chain governance mechanisms and their benefits to the rest of the supply chain. As our evidence touches on upstream supply chain governance mechanisms and their positive effect on supply chain performance and focal firms’ reputations, our results assume significant implications for practitioners who can apply this framework in food supply chains and not only achieve performance benefits but also avoid reputational risk.
The remainder of this article is organized as follows. In Section 2 we describe the results of our literature review, covering governance mechanisms for supply chain sustainability, theoretical background and hypothesis development. In Section 3, the research design is illustrated. This is followed by data analysis and results, which are reported in Section 4. Section 5 discusses the findings, along with a detailed examination of theoretical and practical implications. Finally, in Section 6, we present our conclusions, highlight certain limitations of this study and provide suggestions for future research.
Section snippets
Governance mechanisms for supply chain sustainability
Governance mechanisms refers to structures with the power and ability to determine decision-making in order to direct businesses towards long-term sustainability (Formentini and Taticchi, 2016). Pilbeam et al. (2012) highlight the existence of both formal and informal governance mechanisms within networks. Formal mechanisms comprise control and reporting systems, through which firms structure their interactions in an explicit way, including standard operating procedures, command structure,
Instrument development
The survey instrument was designed and developed in accordance with Dillman's guidelines (Dillman, 2007). A life member of the Poultry Federation of India (PFI) assisted our data collection process. A member of our research team visited the PFI, and was thus able to obtain first-hand information on the poultry business, including issues and challenges for the industry, as well as a list of life members of companies, their contact details and ownership information. Before designing our survey
Data analysis and results
The items representing each construct are shown in Appendix 1. The conceptual model was analyzed in two stages, as recommended by Anderson and Gerbing (1988). First, we performed a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), as this process helps to examine the unidimensionality of the construct. This approach is suitable for testing unidimensionality when the researcher has a priori knowledge about latent variables and their associated empirical indicators, in a theory testing research situation (
Discussions and implications
Our research comprises original implications for practitioners, especially for firms which operate in emerging economies. The research objective was to explore the different effects of governance mechanisms related to sustainability employed by poultry manufacturing firms operating in India. First, our analysis is consistent with the tenets of the global value chain perspective, i.e. that governance mechanisms in upstream supply chain links play a major part in creating value for the customer –
Conclusions, limitations and suggestions for future research
This study examined the links between upstream supply chain governance mechanisms, suppliers' ethical performance, focal firm's supply chain performance and reputation. The results suggest that supplier modular and supplier relational governance mechanisms have an impact on suppliers' ethical performance, supply chain performance and reputation. However, supplier captive mechanisms related to ethical issues show no positive impact on either suppliers' ethical performance or buyers' supply chain
References (99)
Ethical issues in international buyer–supplier relationships: a dyadic examination
J. Oper. Manag.
(2000)- et al.
Green multi-tier supply chain management: an enabler investigation
J. Purch. Supply Manag.
(2018) - et al.
The impact of supply chain integration on performance: a contingency and configuration approach
J. Oper. Manag.
(2010) - et al.
Corporate sustainability approaches and governance mechanisms in sustainable supply chain management
J. Clean. Prod.
(2016) - et al.
Arcs of integration: an international study of supply chain strategies
J. Oper. Manag.
(2001) - et al.
The influence of ethical culture on supplier selection in the context of sustainable sourcing
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
(2012) - et al.
Transaction cost framework in operations and supply chain management research: theory and measurement
J. Oper. Manag.
(2003) - et al.
Applying environmental criteria to supplier assessment
Eur. J. Oper. Res.
(2002) - et al.
Global value chain configuration: a review and research agenda
BRQ Business Res. Q.
(2017) - et al.
Comprehensive and configurable metrics for supplier selection
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
(2007)
Bridging organization theory and supply chain management: the case of best value supply chains
J. Oper. Manag.
Social issues in supply chains: capabilities link responsibility, risk (opportunity), and performance
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
The relationships between supplier development, commitment, social capital accumulation and performance improvement
J. Oper. Manag.
A comprehensive environment friendly approach for supplier selection
Omega
Enablers to implement sustainable initiatives in agri-food supply chains
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Four forces of supply chain social sustainability adoption in emerging economies
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Enhancing supply chain performance through supplier social sustainability: an emerging economy perspective
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Supplier development: improving supplier performance through knowledge transfer
J. Oper. Manag.
Creating value offerings via operant resource-based capabilities
Ind. Market. Manag.
Strategic sourcing with multi-stakeholders through value co-creation: an evidence from global health care company
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Relational bonds in industrial exchange: an experimental test of the transaction cost economic framework
J. Bus. Res.
Supply chain integration and performance: the effects of long-term relationships, information technology and sharing, and logistics integration
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
The impact of operations and supply chain strategies on integration and performance
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Achieving a socially responsible supply chain through assessment and collaboration
J. Clean. Prod.
Investigating the resources for Integrated Management Systems within resource-based and contingency perspective in manufacturing firms
J. Clean. Prod.
An extensive study to assess the sustainability drivers of production performances using a resource-based view and contingency analysis
J. Clean. Prod.
From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management
J. Clean. Prod.
Supply chain coordination to optimize manufacturer's capacity procurement decisions through a new commitment-based model with penalty and revenue-sharing
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Socially responsible governance mechanisms for manufacturing firms in apparel supply chains
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Relationships between operational practices and performance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises
J. Oper. Manag.
Firm-level correlates of emergent green supply chain management practices in the Chinese context
Omega
Structural equation modeling in practice: a review and recommended two-step approach
Psychol. Bull.
Specification, evaluation, and interpretation of structural equation models
J. Acad. Market. Sci.
Ethical Theory and Business
Corporate identity, ethics and reputation in supplier–buyer relationships
J. Bus. Ethics
Supply chain management analysis: a simulation approach to the Value Chain Operations Reference (VCOR) model
Int. J. Value Chain Manag.
Corporate ethical performance: trends, forecasts and outlooks
J. Bus. Ethics
A three-dimensional conceptual model of corporate performance
Acad. Manag. Rev.
The role of purchasing in corporate social responsibility: a structural equation analysis
J. Bus. Logist.
The partial least squares approach to structural equation modeling
Mod. Methods Business Res.
A paradigm for developing better measures of marketing constructs
J. Market. Res.
The governance of global value chains: unresolved human rights, environmental and ethical dilemmas in the apple supply chain
J. Bus. Ethics
The effect of socialization mechanisms and performance measurement on supplier integration in new product development
Br. J. Manag.
Sustainable development in Asian manufacturing SMEs: progress and directions
Int. J. Prod. Econ.
Mail and Internet Surveys: the Tailored Design Method
Social sustainability in selecting emerging economy suppliers
J. Bus. Ethics
Supply management ethical responsibility: reputation and performance impacts
Supply Chain Manag.: Int. J.
Cited by (13)
“Better together”: Right blend of business strategy and digital transformation strategies
2023, International Journal of Production EconomicsSustainability in agribusiness: Analysis of environmental changes in agricultural production using spatial geotechnologies
2023, Environmental DevelopmentInternational vertical alliances within the international business field: A systematic literature review and future research agenda
2023, Journal of World BusinessCitation Excerpt :Through insidership in IVAs, firms can attain the potential gains linked to becoming embedded in and committed to international buyers and suppliers (Johanson & Johanson, 2021; Vahlne & Johanson, 2017). Against this background, the extant IVA studies have focused on a range of issues—such as reinforcing profitably, exploiting unique firm-specific advantages, and creating value by forging IVAs in GVCs and leveraging their governance structures, geography, value creation, and outcomes (Jean et al., 2018; Kano et al., 2020; Mani & Gunasekaran, 2021; McWilliam et al., 2020). Nippa and Reuer (2019) argued that the comparison and integration of evidence on IVAs, and “particularly changes over time, will most likely reveal interesting patterns that will foster the development of new theories of alliance formation and internationalization” (p. 575).
Dynamic game strategies and coordination of closed-loop supply chain considering product remanufacturing and goodwill in the big data environment
2024, Environment, Development and Sustainability