Search results

Firms are increasingly held accountable for the welfare of workers across entire supply chains and so it is surprising that standard forms of governance for socially sustainable supply chain management have not yet emerged. Assessment initiatives have begun to develop as a proxy measure of social sustainable supply chain management. This research aims to examine how social sustainability assessment initiatives instigate and use institutional pressures to drive third-party accreditation as the legitimate means of demonstrating social sustainability in a global supply chain.

Ten assessment initiatives focused on assuring social sustainability across supply chains are examined. Data are collected through interviews with senior managers and publicly available secondary material.

The findings show how the social sustainability assessment initiatives act by instigating institutional pressures indirectly rather than directly. Coercive pressures are the most prevalent and are exerted through consumer and compliance requirements. The notion of pressures operating as a chain is proposed, and the recognition that actors within and outside of a supply chain are crucial to the institutionalization of social sustainability is discussed.

Studies on sustainable supply chain management often focus on how companies sense and act upon institutional pressures. To add to the extant body of knowledge, this study focuses on the sources of the pressures and demonstrates how assessment initiatives use coercive, normative and mimetic pressures to drive the adoption of social sustainability assessment in supply chains.

Although it is commonly agreed that prescriptive analytics can benefit organizations by enabling better decision-making, the deployment of prescriptive analytics tools can be challenging. Previous studies have primarily focused on methodological issues rather than the organizational deployment of analytics. However, successful deployment is key to achieving the intended benefits of prescriptive analytics tools. Therefore, this study aims to identify the enablers of successful deployment of prescriptive analytics.

The authors examine the enablers for the successful deployment of prescriptive analytics through five organizational case studies. To provide a comprehensive view of the deployment process, each case includes interviews with users, managers and top management.

The findings suggest the key enablers for successful analytics deployment are strong leadership and management support, sufficient resources, user participation in development and a common dialogue between users, managers and top management. However, contrary to the existing literature, the authors found little evidence of external pressures to develop and deploy analytics. Importantly, the success of deployment in each case was related to the similarity with which different actors within the organization viewed the deployment process. Furthermore, end users tended to highlight user participation, skills and training, whereas managers and top management placed greater emphasis on the importance of organizational changes.

The results will help practitioners ensure that key enablers are in place to increase the likelihood of the successful deployment of prescriptive analytics.

While classical operations strategy research argues that manufacturing organizations should be managed in line with the operational strategic priorities, recent studies have brought up potential institutional explanations for adoption of various managerial practices, including supply chain management practices. The key point in the institutional argument is that organizations are especially affected by other organizations; imitation and isomorphism are a critical part of organizational behavior. The purpose of this paper is to empirically test the institutional argument in explaining the use of supplier integration mechanisms – one of the focal management practices in today’s organizations.

The authors assess empirically the extent to which various economic institutional factors explain the use of supplier integration mechanisms in manufacturing plants with a multi-country and multi-industry survey sample.

The results indicate that institutional explanations play a significant role in explaining supplier integration. The findings suggest that further emphasis on building research around the institutional argument in various areas of supply chain and operations management is important.

As research on supply chain integration – including supplier integration – has focused on its performance implications, more research on the antecedents to integration is needed. This study provides a test of institutional theory as an antecedent to supplier integration.

Increasing amount of empirical research in operations and supply chain management is using institutional theory as its theoretical lens. Yet, a common scale to measure the three institutional pressures – coercive, mimetic and normative – is lacking. Many studies use proxies or a single, grouped, construct of external pressures which present methodological challenges. This study aims to present the development of multi-item scales to measure institutional pressures (in a purchasing context).

First, items were generated based on the theoretical construct definitions. These items were then tested through academic sorting and an international survey. The first empirical testing failed to produce reliable and valid scales, and further refinement and analysis revealed that coercive pressure splits into two separate constructs. A second q-sorting was then conducted with purchasing practitioners, followed by another survey in Italy to verify the new measurement scale for four institutional pressures.

The multimethod and multistage measurement development reveals that empirically the three institutional pressures actually turn into four pressures. The theoretical construct of coercive pressure splits into two distinct constructs: coercive market pressure and coercive regulatory pressure.

The results of the paper, namely, the measurement scales, are an important theoretical and methodological contribution to future empirical research. They present a much-needed measurement for these theoretical constructs increasingly used in management research.

This paper aims to analyze the roles that African suppliers play in global value chains and the strategies that foreign firms adopt to integrate African firms into their supply chains.

The empirical research of this paper is based on a multiple case study and on interview data of foreign buyers and their entry into African supply markets: five Finnish companies and five Chinese companies were interviewed in 2014-2015.

The authors find that Finnish firms make relatively small investments and start sourcing operations on a small scale, whereas Chinese firms are running large infrastructural projects, relying on local sourcing. African firms typically only play modest roles with little value capture in the chain, supplying raw materials and simple products. The African infrastructural and cultural context makes it challenging for foreign firms to provide local suppliers with more strategic roles in their chains, thus hindering integration of local firms into global value chains.

This paper is one of the first to offer a comparison of Finnish (Western) and Chinese (other emerging economy) firms’ sourcing from Africa and provides understanding of the role of African suppliers in current value chains. The authors offer a qualitative exploration of why companies invest in African suppliers and of the scope of African presence in global value chains.

Despite the widespread organisational adoption of e-procurement systems, we continue to witness disappointing performance outcomes from their implementation. This can be explained largely by the failure of many organisations to translate the initial adoption decision, made at an organisational level, into individual-level acceptance of e-procurement by an organisation’s employees. The purpose of this paper is to examine the key antecedents of the technology acceptance model (TAM) for employees expected to use e-procurement systems in their day-to-day activities.

In this study, the authors apply and extend the TAM to examine the factors that influence the acceptance of e-procurement by individual employees. The authors’ focus is on the potential role of user-perceived e-procurement quality dimensions as the antecedents to the TAM’s cognitive mechanisms of perceived usefulness and perceived ease of use. The structural equation model uses the survey data collected from 139 e-procurement users at a university in the Netherlands.

The results confirm the core TAM relationships within an e-procurement context. Extending the TAM model to explore the antecedents, the authors find that the e-procurement quality dimensions of processing, usability, and professionalism impact the levels of individual employee e-procurement acceptance. Interestingly, the system-level dimensions (processing and usability) appear to play a greater role than the support dimensions (professionalism) in these cognitive mechanisms.

The findings indicate that the need for e-procurement training and on-going support may be lessened by initial effective design covering system navigation and system usability and by ensuring that an e-procurement system has expedient information and product flows between the buyer and supplier.

To the authors’ knowledge, this is the first study to explore the TAM and, more critically, its antecedents within an e-procurement context. It is also the first to empirically validate this extended model. Finally, by shifting the focus from the more typical organisational-level adoption to an individual employee acceptance unit of analysis, the authors provide a better understanding of how organisations can gain the most from investments in e-procurement and other similar e-supply chain management technologies.

Despite the unparalleled importance of value within healthcare, value-based models remain underutilised in the procurement of medical devices. Research is needed to understand what factors incentivise standard, low-priced device purchasing as opposed to value-adding devices with potentially higher overall health outcomes. Framed in agency theory, we examine the conditions under which different actors involved in purchasing decisions select premium-priced, value-adding medical devices over low-priced, standard medical devices.

We conducted 2 × 2 × 2 between-subjects scenario-based vignette experiments on three UK-based online samples of managers (n = 599), medical professionals (n = 279) and purchasing managers (n = 449) with subjects randomly assigned to three treatments: (1) cost-saving incentives, (2) risk-sharing contracts and (3) stronger (versus weaker) clinical evidence.

Our analysis demonstrates the harmful effects of intra-organisational cost-saving incentives on value-based purchasing (VBP) adoption; the positive impact of inter-organisational risk-sharing contracts, especially when medical professionals are involved in decision-making; and the challenge of leveraging clinical evidence to support value claims.

Our results demonstrate the need to align incentives in a context with multiple intra- and inter-organisational agency relationships at play, as well as the difficulty of reducing information asymmetry when information is not easily interpretable to all decision-makers. Overall, the intra-organisational agency factors strongly influenced the choices for the inter-organisational agency relationship.

We contribute to VBP in healthcare by examining the role of intra- and inter-organisational agency relationships and incentives concerning VBP (non-) adoption. We also examine how the impact of such mechanisms differs between medical and purchasing (management) professionals.

Contemporary supply chain relationships inherently rely on delegation of work between organizations and, thus, are subject to agency problems for which a wide range of governance mechanisms exist. This review of agency theory (AT), across four distinct fields, explains the connection between governance mechanisms and supply chain relationship types.

The study uses a systematic literature review (SLR) of articles using AT in a supply chain context from the operations and supply chain management, general management, marketing, and economics fields.

The authors categorize the governance mechanisms identified to create a typology of agency relationships in supply chains.

The developed typology provides parsimonious theory on different forms of supply chain agency relationships and takes a step towards a “supply chain-oriented agency theory” explaining and predicting relationship types and governance in supply chains. Furthermore, a future research agenda calls for more accurate measuring of agency costs, to examine residual gains alongside residual losses, to take a dual-sided perspective of agency relations and to adopt AT to examine more complex supply networks.

The review provides a menu of governance mechanisms and describes situations under which these mechanisms could be deployed to guide managers when developing their supply chain relationships.

The first review to combine and elaborate views from four major disciplines using AT as a lens to supply chain relationships. Expanding the traditional set of governance mechanisms provides academics and practitioners with a bigger “menu” of options to consider.

The purpose of this paper is to compare service outsourcing decisions between public and private organizations and against a theoretical decision-making framework to both understand differences across the sectors and to provide an outsourcing framework more suitable specifically for outsourcing (and for the public sector).

Multiple case studies, i.e. a study of phenomena (here outsourcing process) at various sites is used as an approach.

Findings indicate that public sector organizations are trailing behind private sector organizations in how the decision-making process is conducted and resourced. The authors suggest regular evaluation of service functions internally as a starting point for the outsourcing service decision-making process. Additionally, the market analysis should be done prior to cost analysis and benchmarking as the availability of suppliers more qualified than the internal process defines the make or buy decision.

The newly developed framework based on empirical evidence includes the following phases: regular evaluation of service functions, market analysis, cost analysis and benchmarking and evaluating relevant service activities. Applying the framework improves the efficient delivery of outsourced public services and brings public sector outsourcing closer to the professionalism currently present in the private sector.

Choosing between in-house and outsourced service delivery is a fundamental decision in both private and public sector organizations. Previous outsourcing research has mostly focused on the private sector, with limited focus on the public sector’s outsourcing processes, yet understanding of the service outsourcing process is important in ensuring organizational competitiveness and cost efficiency.