Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Suppliers as Stewards? Managing Social Standards in First- and Second-Tier Suppliers

  • Published:
Journal of Business Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Buyer–supplier relationships are often framed as principal–agent relationships, based on contractual arrangements that temporarily align the goals of both parties. The underlying notion is that the relationship between buyers and suppliers is adversarial in nature and that the supplier, acting in the role of the agent, will take advantage of the principal if not sufficiently controlled. We propose that there is empirically also another type of partnership which reflects the propositions of stewardship theory. According to this theory, suppliers are motivated to work autonomously towards contractually agreed objectives. We analyse how the agency and stewardship theories differ regarding their descriptions of autonomy, motivation, identification, authority, stakeholder orientation and short- versus long-term collaboration. We analyse the case of a first-tier supplier and four second-tier suppliers situated in Turkey in the area of Istanbul which collaborate with the aim of improving their social and environmental performance. The results show that the relationship between the partners in this case has become more collaborative over time and can now be described in terms of stewardship theory rather than in terms of agency theory. We conclude that the distinction between agency and stewardship relationships is empirically meaningful in the context of supplier–buyer relationships and adds a new aspect to our understanding of how to achieve more sustainable supply chains.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Albanese, R., Dacin, T. M., & Harris, I. C. (1997). Agents as stewards. Academy of Management Review, 22(3), 609–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ashby, A., Leat, M., & Hudson-Smith, M. (2012). Making connections: A review of supply chain management and sustainability literature. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 17(5), 497–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Aßländer, M. S. (2011). Corporate stewardship. In M. S. Aßländer (Ed.), Handbuch Wirtschaftsethik [Compendium business ethics] (pp. 338–347). Stuttgart: Verlag J.B. Metzler.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Ayuso, S., Roca, M., & Colomé, R. (2013). SME as “transmitters” of CSR requirements in the supply chain. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 18(5), 497–508.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barratt, M. (2004). Understanding the meaning of collaboration in the supply chain. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 9(1), 30–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bøhren, Ø. (1998). The agent’s ethics in the principal-agent model. Journal of Business Ethics, 17(7), 745–755.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bowie, N. E., & Werhane, P. H. (2005). Management ethics. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Brennan, M. J. (1994). Incentives, rationality, and society. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 7(2), 31–39.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caers, R., Du Bois, C., Jegers, M., De Gieter, S., Schepers, C., & Pepermans, R. (2006). Principal-agent relationships on the stewardship-agency axis. Nonprofit Management & Leadership, 17(1), 25–47.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, C., Hayes, L. A., Karri, R., & Bernal, P. (2008). Ethical stewardship: Implications for leadership and trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(1–2), 153–164.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, C., & Karri, R. (2005). Organizational governance and ethical systems: A covenantal approach to building trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 58(3), 249–259.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Caldwell, C., Karri, R., & Vollmar, P. (2006). Principal theory and principle theory: Ethical governance from the follower’s perspective. Journal of Business Ethics, 66(2–3), 207–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chen, I. J., Paulraj, A., & Lado, A. A. (2004). Strategic purchasing, supply management and firm performance. Journal of Operations Management, 22(5), 505–523.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clean Clothes Campaign. (2009). Cashing in. Giant retailers, purchasing practices, and working conditions in the garment industry. Amsterdam: Clean Clothes Campaign.

    Google Scholar 

  • Coase, R. H. (1937). The nature of the firm. Economica, New Series, 4(16), 386–405.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R., & Canella, A. A., Jr. (2003a). Corporate governance: Decades of dialogue and data. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 371–382.

    Google Scholar 

  • Daily, C. M., Dalton, D. R., & Rajagopalan, N. (2003b). Governance through ownership: Centuries of practice, decades of research. Academy of Management Journal, 46(2), 151–158.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dal, V., & Akcagun, E. (2012). Türk Hazir Giyim Sanayinin Uluslararasi Pazarlarda Üstünlük Saglamasi Icin Rekabet Stratejisi Önerileri. Doctoral Dissertation, Istanbul Chamber of Industry/Marmara University, Istanbul.

  • Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Ellstrand, A. E., & Johnson, J. L. (1998). Meta-analytical reviews of board compensation, leadership structure, and financial performance. Strategic Management Journal, 19(3), 269–290.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dalton, D. R., Daily, C. M., Johnson, J. L., & Ellstrand, A. E. (1999). Number of directors and financial performance: A meta-analysis. Academy of Management Journal, 42(6), 674–686.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, J. H., Schoorman, D. F., & Donaldson, L. (1997). Toward a stewardship theory of management. Academy of Management Review, 22(1), 20–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (1990a). The ethereal hand: Organizational economics and management theory. Academy of Management Review, 15(3), 369–381.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (1990b). A rational basis for criticisms of organizational economics: A reply to Barney. Academy of Management Review, 15(3), 394–401.

    Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (2002). Damned by our own theories: Contradictions between theories and management education. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 1(1), 96–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L. (2008). Ethics problems and problems with ethics: Toward a pro-management theory. Journal of Business Ethics, 78(3), 299–311.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Donaldson, L., & Davis, J. H. (1991). Stewardship theory or agency theory: CEO governance and shareholder returns. Australian Journal of Management, 16(1), 49–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Egels-Zandén, N. (2007). Suppliers’ compliance with MNCs’ codes of conduct: Behind the scenes at Chinese toy suppliers. Journal of Business Ethics, 75(1), 45–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M. (1989). Agency theory: An assessment and review. Academy of Management Review, 14(1), 57–74.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eisenhardt, K. M., & Graebner, M. E. (2007). Theory building from cases: Opportunities and challenges. Academy of Management Journal, 50(1), 25–32.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2009). An introduction to qualitative research (4th ed.). London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Fogarty, T., Magnan, M. L., Markarian, G., & Bohdjalian, S. (2009). Inside agency: The rise and fall of Nortel. Journal of Business Ethics, 84(2), 165–187.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Forman, M., & Jørgensen, M. S. (2004). Organising environmental supply chain management. Greener Management International, 45, 43–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B. S. (1997). On the relationship between intrinsic and extrinsic work motivation. International Journal of Industrial Organization, 15(4), 427–439.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frey, B. S., & Jegen, R. (2001). Motivation crowding theory. Journal of Economic Surveys, 15(5), 589–611.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S. (2005). Bad management theories are destroying good management practices. Academy of Management Learning & Education, 4(1), 75–91.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ghoshal, S., & Moran, P. (1996). Bad for practice: A critique of the transaction cost theory. Academy of Management Review, 21(1), 3–4.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gioia, D. A., Corley, K. G., & Hamilton, A. L. (2012). Seeking qualitative rigor in inductive research: Notes on the Gioia methodology. Organizational Research Methods, 16, 15–31.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gullett, J., Do, L., Canuto-Carranco, M., Brister, M., Turner, S., & Caldwell, C. (2010). The buyer-supplier relationship: An integrative model of ethics and trust. Journal of Business Ethics, 90(3), 329–341.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harney, A. (2008). The China price: The true cost of Chinese competitive advantage. New York: Penguin Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harpur, P. (2011). New governance and the role of public and private monitoring of labor conditions: Sweatshops and China social compliance for textile and apparel industry. Rutgers Law Record, 38(1), 49–73.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relationships. New York: Wiley.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hendry, J. (2002). The principal’s other problems: Honest incompetence and the specification of objectives. Academy of Management Review, 27(1), 98–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hernandez, M. (2007). Promoting stewardship behaviour in organizations: A leadership model. Journal of Business Ethics, 80(1), 121–128.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hofstede, G., Hofstede, G. J., & Minkov, M. (2010). Cultures and organizations: Software of the mind. Columbus, OH: McGraw-Hill.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ims, K. J., Pedersen, L. J. T., & Zsolnai, L. (2014). How economic incentives may destroy social, ecological and existential values: The case of executive compensation. Journal of Business Ethics, 123(2), 353–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Istanbul Chamber of Industry. (2012). Avrupa Birligi’ne Tam Üyelik Sürecinde Istanbul Sanayi Odasi Meslek Komiteleri, Sektör Stratejileri Gelistirilmesi Projesi Giyim Esyasi Imalati Sanayi. Istanbul: Tor Ofset San. ve Tic. Ltd., Sti.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (1994). Self-interest, altruism, incentives, and agency theory. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 7(2), 40–45.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C. (2001). Foundations of organizational strategy. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1976). Theory of the firm: Managerial behaviour, agency costs and ownership structure. Journal of Financial Economics, 3(4), 305–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jensen, M. C., & Meckling, W. H. (1994). The nature of man. Journal of Applied Corporate Finance, 7(2), 4–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, R. E., & Ford, D. (2008). Exploring the concept of asymmetry: A typology for analysing customer-supplier relationships. Industrial Marketing Management, 37(4), 471–483.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Koulikoff-Souviron, M., & Harrison, A. (2006). Buyer-supplier relationships in inter- and intra-organisational supply contexts: The unobtrusive yet pervasive human resource picture. International Journal of Logistics: Research and Applications, 9(1), 75–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kulik, B. W. (2005). Agency theory, reasoning and culture of Enron: In search of a solution. Journal of Business Ethics, 59(4), 347–360.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Labowitz, S., & Baumann-Pauly, D. (2014). Business as usual is not an option: Supply-chains and sourcing after Rana Plaza. New York: New York Leonard N. Stern School of Business – Center of Business and Human Rights.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, R. (2013). The promise and limits of private power: Promoting labor standards in a global economy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Locke, R., Amengual, M., & Mangla, A. (2009). Virtue out of necessity? Compliance, commitment, and the improvement of labour conditions in global supply chains. Politics & Society, 37(3), 319–351.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitnick, B. M. (1998). Agency theory. In P. H. Werhane & R. E. Freeman (Eds.), Encyclopedic dictionary of business ethics (pp. 12–15). Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moeller, S., Fassnacht, M., & Klose, S. (2006). A framework for supplier relationship management (SRM). Journal of Business-to-Business Marketing, 13(4), 69–94.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mohr, J., & Spekman, R. (1994). Characteristics of partnership success: Partnership attributes, communication behaviour, and conflict resolution techniques. Strategic Management Journal, 15(2), 135–152.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Nolan, J., & van Heerden, A. (2013). Engaging business in the business of human rights. In M. Pedersen & D. Kinley (Eds.), Principled engagement: Negotiating human rights in repressive states (pp. 153–170). Farnham, UK: Ashgate Publishing.

    Google Scholar 

  • Noreen, E. (1988). The economics of ethics: A new perspective on agency theory. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 13(4), 359–369.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ozturk, H. K. (2005). Energy usage and cost in textile industry: A case study of Turkey. Energy, 30(13), 2424–2446.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pagell, M., & Shevchenko, A. (2014). Why research in sustainable supply chain management should have no future. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 50(1), 44–55.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pagell, M., & Wu, Z. (2009). Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply chain management using case studies of 10 examples. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 45(2), 37–56.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Paulraj, A., Lado, A. A., & Chen, I. J. (2008). Inter-organizational communication as a relational competency: Antecedents and performance outcomes in collaborative buyer-supplier relations. Journal of Operations Management, 26(1), 45–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Phillips, R., & Caldwell, C. B. (2005). Value chain responsibility: A farewell to arm’s length. Business and Society Review, 110(4), 345–370.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pratt, J. W., & Zeckhauser, R. J. (1985). Principals and agents: An overview. In J. W. Pratt & R. J. Zeckhauser (Eds.), Principals and agents. The structure of business (pp. 1–35). Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Roloff, J., & Aßländer, M. S. (2010). Corporate autonomy and buyer-supplier relationships: The case of unsafe Mattel toys. Journal of Business Ethics, 97(4), 517–534.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Santoro, M. (2009). China 2020: How western business can—and should—influence social and political change in the coming decade. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sethi, S. P. (2003). Setting global standards: Guidelines for creating codes of conduct in multinational corporations. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Spekman, R. E., Kamauff, J. W, Jr, & Myhr, N. (1998). An empirical investigation into supply chain management: A perspective on partnerships. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 28(8), 630–650.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Strauss, A., & Corbin, J. (1998). Basics of qualitative research. Techniques and procedures for developing grounded theory. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sundaramurthy, C., & Lewis, M. (2003). Control and collaboration: Paradoxes of governance. Academy of Management Review, 28(3), 397–415.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tachizawa, E. M., & Wong, C. Y. (2014). Towards a theory of multi-tier sustainable supply chains: A systematic literature review. Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, 19(5/6), 643–663.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Walker, M. (1989). Agency theory: A falsificationist perspective. Accounting, Organizations and Society, 14(5–6), 433–453.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wang, H. (2005). Asian transnational corporation and labor rights: Vietnamese trade unions in Taiwan-invested companies. Journal of Business Ethics, 56(1), 43–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wasserman, N. (2006). Stewards, agents, and the founder discount: Executive compensation in new ventures. Academy of Management Journal, 49(5), 960–976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wilson, D. T. (1995). An integrated model of buyer-seller relationships. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 23(4), 335–345.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wiseman, R. M., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (1998). A behavioral agency model of managerial risk taking. Academy of Management Review, 23(1), 133–153.

    Google Scholar 

  • WTO. (2013). Uruguay round agreement: Agreement on textiles and clothing. http://www.wto.org/english/docs_e/legal_e/16-tex_e.htm.

  • Wuyts, S., & Geyskens, I. (2005). The formation of buyer-supplier relationships: Detailed contract drafting and close partner selection. Journal of Marketing, 69(4), 103–117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Young, I. M. (2004). Responsibility and global labour justice. Journal of Political Philosophy, 12(4), 365–388.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zadek, S. (2004). The path of corporate responsibility. Harvard Business Review, 82(December), 125–132.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Social Sciences, International Graduate School Zittau, Technical University Dresden, Markt 23, 02763, Zittau, Germany

    Michael S. Aßländer

  2. Management and Organization, ESC Rennes, 2, rue Robert d’Arbrissel, 35065, Rennes, France

    Julia Roloff

  3. Department of Business Administration in German Language, Faculty of Business Administration, Marmara University, Anadoluhisarı, 34810, Istanbul, Turkey

    Dilek Zamantili Nayır

Authors
  1. Michael S. Aßländer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Julia Roloff
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Dilek Zamantili Nayır
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia Roloff.

Appendix

Appendix

Interviews

SLN: First-tier supplier of Puma, privately owned company, owner-manager, stitching company and dying house, about 70 % of the production for Puma, around 330 employees

STS 1: second-tier supplier, family owned company, owner-manager, printing and embroidery, working also for other companies

STS 2: second-tier supplier, family owned company, hired management, stitching company, subcontractor of SLN, 100 % production for Puma, around 150 employees

STS 3: second-tier supplier, family owned company, owner-manager, stitching company, subcontractor of SLN, main part of the production for Puma, around 100 employees

STS 4: second-tier supplier, company owned by two partners, owner-manager, printing, working also for other companies, about 35 % of the production for Puma, around 40 employees

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Aßländer, M.S., Roloff, J. & Nayır, D.Z. Suppliers as Stewards? Managing Social Standards in First- and Second-Tier Suppliers. J Bus Ethics 139, 661–683 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3148-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-016-3148-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation