Where Do We Go From Here? Progressing Sustainability Implementation Efforts Across Supply Chains

• Author: Sebastian Brockhaus,Wolfgang Kersten,A. Michael Knemeyer
• Published date: 01 June 2013
• DOI: http://doi.org/10.1111/jbl.12017
• Date: 01 June 2013

Where Do We Go From Here? Progressing Sustainability

Implementation Efforts Across Supply Chains

Sebastian Brockhaus

1

, Wolfgang Kersten

1

, and A. Michael Knemeyer

2

1

Hamburg University of Technology

2

The Ohio State University

The findings from an inductive study conducted in the United States and Europe focused on sustainability implementation efforts across

supply chains are reported. In particular, the study focuses on developing a better understanding of: “how do companies involve other

members of their supply chain into their sustainability efforts?”Building upon themes that emerged from the data, a typology for the supply

chain implementation of sustainability initiatives is proposed. A lack of supply chain integration was identified and companies reported a ten-

dency toward a “mandated”implementation when extending efforts across companies. These efforts are generally initiated by the dominant

companies and then forced onto the weaker upstream members. The data suggests that the merits of these initiatives are viewed as being dispro-

portionately awarded to the dominant firm and thus did not receive full buy-in from the other party. A common vision by both sides of this

relationship is to develop a more collaborative implementation that can be supported by all the involved parties. In theoretical implications,

empirical findings are viewed through the lens of several prominent management theories in order to augment and elaborate current theory.

Managerial implications, limitations, and opportunities for further research are detailed.

Keywords: sustainability; supply chain integration; collaboration

We were in a meeting with a retailer 2 years ago. They

said: ‘You WILL [emphasis added] provide us with a sus-

tainable product’. We won’t forget. It wasn’t a question; it

wasn’t a request; it was a statement. (Interview # 17,

Home Appliances, U.S.)

INTRODUCTION

Today’s consumers pay attention to the environmental impacts of

the products they use. Although this awareness might not translate

directly into buying behavior—83% of consumers in a recent poll

expected companies to become more environmentally friendly,

whereas only 22% were going to pay more for environmentally

sustainable products (The Nielsen Company 2011)—as such, sus-

tainability claims surely impact the perception consumers have of

products, for the better or worse (Luchs et al. 2010). Conse-

quently, an increase in interest in the topic from an industry per-

spective has been observed (Markley and Davis 2007) and the

topic is considered a megatrend in today’s global economy worthy

of additional academic focus (Lubin and Esty 2010; Carter and

Easton 2011; Fawcett et al. 2011). Despite this rising level of

attention, sustainability is often treated as an abstract, relative con-

cept (Faber et al. 2005)—the diversity of business strategies, mar-

keting campaigns, product introductions, and whole corporations

labeled “sustainable”adds to the fuzziness around the concept.

There has been only a limited amount of research focused on

developing and expanding theory in the area of sustainability as

the term was first defined by the Brundtland Commission as

“meeting the needs of the present without compromising the

ability of future generations to meet their own needs”(WCED

1987, 8). This perspective toward sustainability is still prevalent

in academia, industry, and public media even though alterations

(e.g., Solow 1993) and new definitions (e.g., Ehrenfeld 2008)

have emerged (Laws et al. 2004). For this study, the term sus-

tainability describes all activities aimed at improving the social

and ecological performance of a company while also retaining

the financial bottom line (Carter and Rogers 2008; Baumgartner

and Ebner 2010). This view toward sustainability is based on the

concept of the “triple bottom line”(TBL), which includes eco-

nomic, social, and ecological perspectives (Elkington 1998).

There have been several attempts to translate the concept of

sustainability into business strategy, often referred to as corporate

sustainability (Rob

ert et al. 2002; Baumgartner and Ebner 2010).

However, implementation in practice still lacks a comprehensive

structure and supply chain perspective (Baumgartner and Ebner

2010; Lubin and Esty 2010; Connelly et al. 2011b). This lack of

structure is a central reason why even sincere attempts to imple-

ment sustainability often result in superficial solutions that deli-

ver insignificantly improved ecological performance, sometimes

referred to as “greenwashing”(Laufer 2003; Ramus and Montiel

2005). Although “greenwashing”implies intentionally deceiving

consumers about the ecological performance of a product by

making it appear “greener”than it actually is, one might extend

this perspective to a sustainability initiative that overstates posi-

tive results due to a lack of true supply chain integration and

clear structure for ensuring cross-firm alignment—despite a

firm’s good intentions.

Therefore, the underlying research question of this study is to

better understand “how companies involve other members of their

supply chain into their sustainability efforts?”Although existing

work and theories provide insights into the implementation within

Corresponding author:

Sebastian Brockhaus, Institute of Business Logistics and General Man-

agement, Hamburg University of Technology, Schwarzenbergstraße95,

21073 Hamburg,Germany; E-mail: sebastian.brockhaus@tuhh.de

Journal of Business Logistics, 2013, 34(2): 167–182

© Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals

the four walls of an individual company and the formation of rela-

tionships in a supply chain, only a limited amount of research has

focused on the interplay between companies as it relates specifi-

cally to sustainability efforts.

In the next section, the extant literature is presented and then

offered as motivation for addressing the issue of how to imple-

ment sustainability efforts from a supply chain perspective. Fol-

lowing this, the methodological process used in this research is

described. Next, the findings of the analysis are presented,

accompanied by relevant excerpts from the qualitative data,

which reflect emerging concepts. This section establishes a typol-

ogy for implementing sustainability initiatives across one’s sup-

ply chain and makes propositions for further inquiry. This is

followed by a presentation of the theoretical and managerial

implications of the findings from the study, along with limita-

tions and future research opportunities. Finally, conclusions are

drawn.

LITERATURE REVIEW

While the concept of sustainability has been around for decades,

a clearer understanding of the topic has only emerged in the past

20 years (Haugh and Talwar 2010). As sustainability has been

discussed in several publications in recent years, the point of this

research was to focus on the implementation of the concept

across the network of companies that represent a supply chain

and expand existing theory surrounding this specific issue as the-

oretical gaps can be identified in this context (Carter and Rogers

2008).

Green supply chain management

There are several streams of literature that cover the role of sus-

tainability in supply chain management (SCM). One of the major

areas is the field generally termed green SCM (GSCM). As the

term suggests, the focus here is on the environmental aspects of

supply chains. The literature reviews by Srivastava (2007) and

Abukhader and J€

onson (2004) provide a good overview of this

stream of research. Both articles point out that GSCM is mainly

derived from a reverse logistics angle, but also has inputs from

concepts focusing on overall process efficiency. Reverse logistics

describes the upstream flow of resources in combination with a

reduction in materials to make the transport more efficient (Car-

ter and Ellram 1998). Reverse logistics activities play an impor-

tant role with respect to the environmental impact of supply

chains and have received amplified attention in the literature. For

a current review of work in this area, see Chan et al. (2010).

Srivastava (2007) examines the synergy of the ecological and

economic aspects of SCM. This notion has been promoted by

several authors before when describing the role of “green”for

competitive advantage (e.g., Porter and Van der Linde 1995a,b;

Florida 1996; Rao and Holt 2005; Kersten et al. 2010; Mol-

lenkopf et al. 2010). This literature suggests that resource effi-

ciency leads to a reduction in operating costs as well as having a

positive environmental impact and thus strengthens the competi-

tive position of the enterprise. However, as Mollenkopf et al.

(2010) and Kersten et al. (2010) among others caution, creating

genuine and long-lasting competitive advantage for the entire

supply chain also requires a stable and fair distribution of the

burdens and benefits across the companies involved.

Sustainable supply chain management

The literature analysis by Seuring and M€

uller (2008b) broadens

the view from GSCM to also including the social dimension and

thus—drawing on the TBL approach—provides an overview of

the sustainable SCM (SSCM) literature. SSCM is defined “as the

strategic, transparent integration and achievement of an organiza-

tion’s social, environmental, and economic goals in the systemic

coordination of key inter-organizational business processes for

improving the long-term economic performance of the individual

company and its supply chains”(Carter and Rogers 2008, 368).

Furthermore, Carter and Rogers (2008) assert SSCM that lacks a

theoretical background and suggest a framework for sustainable

supply chains that supports the concept of intercompany integra-

tion in pursuit of sustainability.

Analogous to the asserted synergy between the ecological and

economic bottom line, among SCM researchers, there is a gen-

eral consensus that companies can create competitive advantage

through sustainability-focused activities (e.g., Hart 1995; Bekefi

and Epstein 2008; Flint and Golicic 2009; Godfrey et al. 2009;

Hart and Dowell 2011). The natural resource-based view of the

firm as introduced by Hart (1995) suggests a decisive effect on

competitive positioning for sustainability issues (Carter and Eas-

ton 2011). Although the positive impact of sustainability on the

competitive position is well documented theoretically and anec-

dotally for individual companies, current literature lacks insights

into how the notion of sustainability can be implemented—espe-

cially with regard to intercompany initiatives (Wolf 2011).

To shed light on this aspect, a further clarification of the

understanding of sustainability and SSCM is needed. As stated

previously, the TBL is the main theoretical underpinning for sus-

tainability in this study. The TBL concept was further adapted

by Carter and Rogers (2008), as part of their framework for

SSCM. The notion of interorganizationality and the fact that

even though all three bottom lines are mentioned, ultimately

long-term economic performance is the firm’s goal, are the main

Figure 1: Illustration of sustainable supply chain management.

168 S. Brockhaus et al.