Search results

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.

This study conducts a systematic literature review (SLR) on social inclusion within upstream supply chains, targeting a notable literature gap in modern SCM discourse. By delving into this critical, yet underexamined, domain, this study spotlights the pressing need to incorporate social inclusion practices, particularly as global supply chains face increased scrutiny over their social ramifications. It examines social inclusion’s intricacies, offering practical insights for industry professionals to adopt, so that trustworthy social inclusion practices can proliferate across their upstream supply chains, thereby making a substantial contribution to both theoretical understanding and practical application.

Employing five search queries across two leading academic databases, this investigation reviewed 86 articles that examined social issues related to social inclusion in the upstream supply chain. Via content analysis, this study aims to answer essential research questions and employs statistical bibliometric analyses to investigate the collected data further.

This study’s findings establish a definition of social inclusion within the upstream supply chain and present a conceptual framework delineating levers and indicators for evaluating such practices. Through rigorous analysis, it becomes apparent that mechanisms such as supplier compliance, collaboration and development are crucial for promoting social inclusion; however, their importance differs at various levels of suppliers in multi-tiered supply chains. Furthermore, a methodological matrix is introduced for assessing social inclusion practices’ efficacy, equipping practitioners with a roadmap for developing and executing strategies that extend social inclusion efforts throughout the supply chain, as well as emphasising these levers through monitoring, assessment and application of six specified indicators.

This study contributes to the dialogue surrounding upstream supply chain management by spotlighting social inclusion practices, addressing the literature gap in comprehending how social inclusion dynamics operate within upstream supply chains and outlining a distinct direction for forthcoming research. By highlighting the pressing importance of enhancing social inclusion practices, this study not only enriches the theoretical landscape but also lays the groundwork for subsequent empirical studies aimed at deciphering the complexities and practical hurdles associated with the efficient execution of these practices.

The purpose of this paper is to investigate why multi-tier apparel suppliers integrate social sustainability practices into their supply chains and what barriers these suppliers encounter while embedding social sustainability practices.

This study employs a qualitative research design, drawing on data from semi-structured interviews with 46 owners and managers from 33 multi-tier apparel suppliers in Bangladesh, an important outsourcing hub for the global apparel industry. To corroborate research findings, the views of owners and managers were triangulated by further interviewing 11 key representatives of institutional actors such as third-party auditors, a donor agency, industry associations, regulatory agencies and a non-governmental organisation (NGO).

The authors' findings suggest a range of divergent institutional drivers and barriers – coercive, mimetic and normative – that determine the implementation of multi-tier suppliers' social sustainability practices. The key reported drivers were buyers' requirements, external stakeholders' expectations, top management commitment and competition. Conversely, cost and resource concerns and gaps in the regulatory framework were identified as key social sustainability implementation barriers. In particular, owners and managers of second-tier and third-tier supplier firms experienced more internal barriers such as cost and resource concerns than external barriers such as gaps in values, learning and commitment (i.e. compromise for mutual benefit and non-disclosure of non-compliance) that impeded effective social sustainability implementation.

Social sustainability in supply chain management has received significant attention from academics, business practitioners, governments, NGOs and supranational organisations. However, limited attention has been paid to investigating the drivers and barriers for social sustainability implementation from a developing country's multi-tier supplier perspective. The authors' research has addressed this knowledge gap.

The evidence from the authors' study provides robust support for key assumptions of institutional theory and has useful implications for both managers and policy-makers.

The authors' study contributes to the embryonic research stream of socially sustainable multi-tier supply chain management by connecting it to the application of institutional theory in a challenging institutional context.

Forced labour is one of the most exploitative practices in supply chains, generating serious human right abuses. The authors seek to understand how relationships for reducing forced labour are influenced by institutional logics. The emerging supply chain efforts of social enterprises offer particularly intriguing approaches, as their social mission can spur creative new approaches and reshape widely adopted management practices.

The authors study supplier relationships in the smartphone industry and compare the evolving practices of two cases: the first, a growing novel social enterprise; and the second, a high-profile commercial firm that has adopted a progressive role in combating forced labour.

The underlying institutional logic influenced each firm's willingness to act beyond its direct suppliers and to collaborate in flexible ways that create systematic change. Moreover, while both focal firms had clear, well-documented procedures related to forced labour, the integration, rather than decoupling, of forced labour and general supply chain policies provided a more effective way to reduce the risks of forced labour in social enterprises.

As authors’ comparative case study approach may lack generalizability, future research is needed to broadly test their propositions.

The paper identifies preconditions in terms of institutional logics to successfully reduce the risk of forced labour in supply chains.

This paper discusses how social enterprises can provide a learning laboratory that enables commercial firms to identify options for supplier relationship improvement.

In this paper, we investigate the coevolution of the supply network and procurement strategies in the context of semiconductors and electronics for the automotive industry over 3 decades. We aim to explain how procurement strategy interrelates with changes in supply network structure and what the implications of a hub-centric structure network structure are for procurement in supply.

We collected in-depth primary and secondary data that stretched back to 1996 from a leading automotive European original equipment manufacturer (OEM) and its network. Using social network analysis (SNA), we identified OEMs’ procurement focus and mapped the evolution of the supply network, the links in the network, and the environmental forces impacting the strategies and the network.

Our findings describe the supply network for semiconductor and electronic components to the automotive industry. The findings suggest that a focus on cost can lead to a Tier 1-centric network structure with many tiers that can fail to assure supply or capture innovation when the external environment is marked by high uncertainty. In such situations, increasing complexity by creating more links in the network can improve transparency and contribute to supply assurance and innovation.

The findings indicate that managers should consider the role of the supply network in selecting their strategy to attain objectives of cost, innovation, and supply assurance.

This paper presents empirical-based insights into the automotive semiconductor and electronic component supply chain (SC), the unexpected implications of hub-centric supply networks, and the use of SNA in the SC in context.

In light of the recently experienced systemic shocks (the COVID-19 pandemic and the war in Ukraine), we investigate supply chain robustness. We aim to understand the potential consequences of uncertain events or adversary’s action on critical supplies in the Alliance.

We leverage a parsimonious supply chain model and investigate the relationship between upstream supplier concentration/diversification and the supply chain’s robustness (survival probability) in the presence of uncertain systemic shocks. In several scenarios of shock events, we simulate alternative input sourcing strategies in the presence of uncertainty.

A firm-level cost-focused optimisation may lead all upstream suppliers to concentrate in one location, which – when subsequently hit by a shock – would result in a disruption of the entire supply chain. A chain-level forward-looking optimisation diversifies the upstream supplier location and sourcing decisions. As a result, the supply chain’s survival probability is maximised, and critical supplies will continue even under the most demanding circumstances.

Our findings encourage political and military decision makers to enhance upstream supply chain robustness in critical and strategic sectors, such as the diversification of nitrocellulose supplies currently sourced almost exclusively from China by European gunpowder manufacturers.

Our findings have direct recommendations to supply chain downstream decision makers and to the government’s policy choices. Since global supply chain (GSC) disruptions in critical sectors may have catastrophic impacts on social welfare and the probability of shocks such as COVID-19 and Russia’s war may not be known even approximately, robust decision rules seem to be the appropriate tools for policymaking in critical and strategic sectors such as energy supplies, food and water, communication and defence. A robust supply chain is one in which the survival probability is maximised, which we show in a central planner strategy’s simulations.

The paper shows formally why a market-based global input sourcing strategy may be efficient from an individual firm’s perspective but may be suboptimal from a societal resilience perspective.

Cybersecurity has received growing attention from academic researchers and industry practitioners as a strategy to accelerate performance gains and social sustainability. Meanwhile, firms are usually prone to cyber-risks that emanate from their supply chain partners especially third-party logistics providers (3PLs). Thus, it is crucial to implement cyber-risks management in 3PLs to achieve social sustainability in supply chains. However, these 3PLs are faced with critical difficulties which tend to hamper the consistent growth of cybersecurity. This paper aims to analyze these critical difficulties.

Data were sourced from 40 managers in Nigerian 3PLs with the aid of questionnaires. A novel quantitative methodology based on the synergetic combination of interval-valued neutrosophic analytic hierarchy process (IVN-AHP) and multi-objective optimization on the basis of a ratio analysis plus the full multiplicative form (MULTIMOORA) is applied. Sensitivity analysis and comparative analysis with other decision models were conducted.

Barriers were identified from published literature, finalized using experts’ inputs and classified under organizational, institutional and human (cultural values) dimensions. The results highlight the most critical dimension as human followed by organizational and institutional. Also, the results pinpointed indigenous beliefs (e.g. cyber-crime spiritualism), poor humane orientation, unavailable specific tools for managing cyber-risks and skilled workforce shortage as the most critical barriers that show the highest potential to elicit other barriers.

By illustrating the most significant barriers, this study will assist policy makers and industry practitioners in developing strategies in a coordinated and sequential manner to overcome these barriers and thus, achieve socially sustainable supply chains.

This research pioneers the use of IVN-AHP-MULTIMOORA to analyze cyber-risks management barriers in 3PLs for supply chain social sustainability in a developing nation.

To motivate the supplier to exert more corporate social responsibility (CSR) effort, the manufacturer offers it either a revenue sharing contract or a cost sharing contract. We study the contract choice of the manufacturer.

We develop game theoretic models to investigate the manufacturer’s optimal contract choice and examine whether there is a conflict of contract preference between the manufacturer and the supplier.

First, the revenue sharing contract has more strict conditions regarding the unit cost of the supplier’s CSR effort and the manufacturer’s retail price. Second, the cost sharing contract enables the manufacturer to achieve a “win-win” performance in terms of both profitability and CSR effort. Finally, the supplier prefers the cost sharing contract when the manufacturer’s price is low, otherwise, it prefers the revenue sharing contract.

Differing from the papers on CSR, our paper focuses on the supplier CSR management problem, and analyzes the optimal contract to motivate the supplier to exert more CSR effort.

Neo-institutional theories and their constructs have so far only received limited attention in supply chain management literature. As recent supply chain disruptions and their ripple effects affect actors on a broader institutional level, supply chains are confronted with multiple new and emerging, often conflicting, institutional demands. This study aims to unpack the notion of institutional complexity behind supply chain disruptions and present a novel institutional framework to lower supply chain susceptibility and increase supply chain resilience.

The authors identify the patterns of complexity that shape the supply chain susceptibility, namely, distance, diversity and ambiguity, and present three institutional responses to susceptibility to increase supply chain resilience, namely, institutional entrepreneurship, institutional alignment and institutional layering.

This paper analyses the current situational relevance to better understand the various and patterned ways how logics influence both supply chain susceptibility and the supply chain resilience. The authors derive six propositions on how complexity can be reduced for supply chain susceptibility and can be increased for supply chain resilience.

By expanding and extending research on institutional complexity to supply chains, the authors broaden how researchers in supply chain management view supply chain susceptibility, thereby providing managers with theory to think differently about supply chains and its resilience.

This paper investigates the role of institutional pressures (IPs) and supply chain integration (SCI) in driving the adoption of circular economy (CE) practices. It is hypothesised that, responding to IPs, firms might adopt higher levels of SCI in the attempt to implement CE practices.

A research model is developed and tested on a cross-sectional sample of 150 multi-national enterprises (MNEs). Textual content from corporate sustainability reports is used to measure the constructs of interest through an advanced coding approach.

Findings show that IPs are driving the adoption of CE practices primarily through the mediation of SCI; the prominent roles of coercive regulatory pressures (CRPs) and normative pressures (NPs) are also highlighted. CRPs influence on CE practices is partially mediated by SCI, with NPs influence being fully mediated by it.

The study shows that SCI is a key mechanism that lies in between IPs and CE practices; as such, organisations interested in implementing CE practices need to be aware of requirements for achieving higher levels of SCI.

This empirical study is the first large scale analysis that conceptualises how MNE-driven supply chains adopt CE practices. The study empirically validates the model and identifies research avenues in supply chain management (SCM) research to support the adoption of CE practices.