Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The Relationship Between Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Stakeholder Pressure and Corporate Sustainability Performance

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

Abstract

In 2009, Greenpeace launched an aggressive campaign against Nestlé, accusing the organization of driving rainforest deforestation through its palm oil suppliers. The objective was to damage the brand image of Nestlé and, thereby, force the organization to make its supply chain more sustainable. Prominent cases such as these have led to the prevailing view that sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) is primarily reactive and propelled by external pressures. This research, in contrast, assumes that SSCM can contribute positively to the reputation of an organization as a “good citizen” and, thereby, counter the impression that external stakeholder pressure is the only driver of SSCM. The study draws on Resource Dependence Theory in analyzing the three competing models of the potential stakeholder, SSCM and the corporate sustainability performance relationship. A dataset of 1,621 organizations allows the statistical comparison of these three models. Findings suggest that stakeholder pressure and SSCM both contribute to an organization’s sustainability performance. Thus, supply chain managers will perceive benefits from SSCM other than merely the reduction of risk from reputational damage through stakeholder activism.

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

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

Abbreviations

CSP:

Corporate sustainability performance

RDT:

Resource dependence theory

SCM:

Supply chain management

SSCM:

Sustainable supply chain management

References

  • Agle, B. R., Mitchell, R. K., & Sonnenfeld, J. A. (1999). Who matters to CEO’s? An investigation of stakeholder attributes and salience, corporate performance and CEO values. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 507–525.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bai, C., & Sarkis, J. (2010). Green supplier development: Analytical evaluation using rough set theory. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18(12), 1200–1210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Banerjee, S. B. (2003). Who sustains whose development? Sustainable development and the reinvention of nature. Organization Studies, 24(1), 143–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 51(6), 1173–1182.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Berman, S. L., Wicks, A. C., Kotha, S., & Jones, T. M. (1999). Does stakeholder orientation matter? The relationship between stakeholder management models and firm financial performance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(5), 488–506.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Björklund, M. (2011). Influence from the business environment on environmental purchasing: Drivers and hinders of purchasing green transportation services. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 17(1), 11–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Buysse, K., & Verbeke, A. (2003). Proactive environmental strategies: A stakeholder management perspective. Strategic Management Journal, 24(5), 453–471.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. R. (2005). Purchasing social responsibility and firm performance: The key mediating roles of organizational learning and supplier performance. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 35(3), 177–194.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. R., & Jennings, M. M. (2004). The role of purchasing in corporate social responsibility: A structural equation analysis. Journal of Business Logistics, 25(1), 145–186.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. R., Kale, R., & Grimm, C. M. (2000). Environmental purchasing and firm performance: An empirical investigation. Transportation Research Part E, 36(3), 219–228.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: Moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(5), 360–387.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Corbett, C. J., & Klassen, R. D. (2006). Extending the horizons: Environmental excellence as key to improving operations. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, 8(1), 5–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Darnall, N., Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (2010). Adopting proactive environmental strategy: The influence of stakeholders and firm size. Journal of Management Studies, 47(6), 1072–1094.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. (2001). Stakeholders and competitive advantage: The case for ISO 14001. Production & Operations Management, 10(3), 343–358.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M., & Montiel, I. (2008). The diffusion of voluntary international management standards: Responsible care, ISO 9000, and ISO 14001 in the chemical industry. Policy Studies Journal, 36(1), 65–93.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Delmas, M. A., & Toffel, M. W. (2008). Organizational responses to environmental demands: Opening the black box. Strategic Management Journal, 29(10), 1027–1055.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Denend, L. (2007). Wal-Mart’s sustainability strategy (Case OIT-71), 1–50. Stanford: Stanford Graduate School of Management.

  • Donaldson, T., & Preston, L. E. (1995). The stakeholder theory of the corporation: Concepts, evidence, and implications. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 65–91.

    Google Scholar 

  • Eesley, C., & Lenox, M. J. (2006). Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management Journal, 27(8), 765–781.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Emerson, R. M. (1962). Power-dependence relations. American Sociological Review, 27(1), 31–41.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Foerstl, K., Reuter, C., Hartmann, E., & Blome, C. (2010). Managing supplier sustainability risks in a dynamically changing environment: Sustainable supplier management in the chemical industry. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 16(2), 118–130.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Frooman, J. (1999). Stakeholder influence strategies. Academy of Management Review, 24(2), 191–205.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gavetti, G., Levinthal, D. A., & Rivkin, J. W. (2005). Strategy making in novel and complex worlds: The power of analogy. Strategic Management Journal, 26(8), 691–712.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Benito, J., & González-Benito, O. (2006). The role of stakeholder pressure and managerial values in the implementation of environmental logistics practices. International Journal of Production Research, 44(7), 1353–1373.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez-Benito, J., & Gonzalez-Benito, O. (2010). A study of determinant factors of stakeholder environmental pressure perceived by industrial companies. Business Strategy & the Environment, 19(4), 164–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Rabin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. L. (2006). Multivariate data analysis (6th ed.). Upper Saddle River: Pearson Prentice Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • Harrison, J. S., Bosse, D. A., & Phillips, R. A. (2010). Managing for stakeholders, stakeholder utility functions, and competitive advantage. Strategic Management Journal, 31(1), 58–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L. (1995). A natural resource-based view of the firm. Academy of Management Review, 20(4), 986–1014.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hart, S. L., & Sharma, S. (2004). Engaging fringe stakeholders for competitive imagination. Academy of Management Executive, 18(1), 7–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Henriques, I., & Sadorsky, P. (1999). The relationship between environmental commitment and managerial perceptions of stakeholder importance. Academy of Management Journal, 42(1), 87–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., & Keim, G. D. (2001). Shareholder value, stakeholder management, and social issues: What’s the bottom line? Strategic Management Journal, 22(2), 125–139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hillman, A. J., Withers, M. C., & Collins, B. J. (2009). Resource dependence theory: A review. Journal of Management, 35(6), 1404–1427.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hull, C. E., & Rothenberg, S. (2008). Firm performance: The interactions of corporate social performance with innovation and industry differentiation. Strategic Management Journal, 29(7), 781–789.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jiang, B. (2009). The effects of interorganizational governance on supplier’s compliance with SCC: An empirical examination of compliant and non-compliant suppliers. Journal of Operations Management, 27(4), 267–280.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K. G., & Sörbom, D. (1993). LISREL 8: User’s reference guide. Chicago: Scientific Software International.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kassinis, G., & Vafeas, N. (2006). Stakeholder pressures and environmental performance. Academy of Management Journal, 49(1), 145–159.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Large, R. O., & Gimenez, C. (2011). Drivers of green supply management performance: Evidence from Germany. Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, 17(3), 176–184.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee, S.-Y., & Klassen, R. D. (2008). Drivers and enablers that foster environmental management capabilities in small- and medium-sized suppliers in supply chains. Production & Operations Management, 17(6), 573–586.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Markley, M. J., & Davis, L. (2007). Exploring future competitive advantage through sustainable supply chains. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 37(9), 763–774.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mitchell, R. K., Agle, B. R., & Wood, D. J. (1997). Toward a theory of stakeholder identification and salience: defining the principle of who and what really counts. Academy of Management Review, 22(4), 853–886.

    Google Scholar 

  • Murillo-Luna, J. L., Garcés-Ayerbe, C., & Rivera-Torres, P. (2008). Why do patterns of environmental response differ? A stakeholders’ pressure approach. Strategic Management Journal, 29(11), 1225–1240.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2010). Mplus. Statistical analysis with latent variables. User’s guide (6th ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.

    Google Scholar 

  • New, S. (2010). The transparent supply chain. Harvard Business Review, 88(10), 76–82.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parmigiani, A., Klassen, R. D., & Russo, M. V. (2011). Efficiency meets accountability: Performance implications of supply chain configuration, control, and capabilities. Journal of Operations Management, 29(3), 212–223.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pfeffer, J., & Salancik, G. R. (1978). The external control of organizations: A resource dependence perspective. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    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 

  • Podsakoff, P. M., MacKenzie, S. B., Lee, J.-Y., & Podsakoff, N. P. (2003). Common method biases in behavioral research: A critical review of the literature and recommended remedies. Journal of Applied Psychology, 88(5), 879–904.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pullman, M. E., Maloni, M. J., & Carter, C. R. (2009). Food for thought: Social versus environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes. Journal of Supply Chain Management: A Global Review of Purchasing & Supply, 45(4), 38–54.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Reuter, C., Foerstl, K., Hartmann, E., & Blome, C. (2010). Sustainable global supplier management: The role of dynamic capabilities in achieving competitive advantage. Journal of Supply Chain Management: A Global Review of Purchasing & Supply, 46(2), 45–63.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkis, J., Gonzalez-Torre, P., & Adenso-Diaz, B. (2010). Stakeholder pressure and the adoption of environmental practices: The mediating effect of training. Journal of Operations Management, 28(2), 163–176.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sarkis, J., Zhu, Q., & Lai, K-h. (2011). An organizational theoretic review of green supply chain management literature. International Journal of Production Economics, 130(1), 1–15.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S. (2000). Managerial interpretations and organizational context as predictors of corporate choice of environmental strategy. Academy of Management Journal, 43(4), 681–697.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., & Henriques, I. (2005). Stakeholder influences on sustainability practices in the Canadian forest products industry. Strategic Management Journal, 26(2), 159–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sharma, S., & Vredenburg, H. (1998). Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organizational capabilities. Strategic Management Journal, 19(8), 729–754.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Surroca, J., Tribó, J. A., & Waddock, S. (2010). Corporate responsibility and financial performance: The role of intangible resources. Strategic Management Journal, 31(5), 463–490.

    Google Scholar 

  • The Economist. (2010). The other oil spill. Economist, 71–73. London: Economist Newspaper Limited.

  • Tribó, J. A., & Surroca, J. (2011). Can we trust cheap social talk? In Annual Conference of the Strategic Management Society, Miami, Florida, November 2011

  • Ullman, A. A. (1985). Data in search of a theory: A critical examination of the relationships among social performance, social disclosure, and economic performance of U.S. firms. Academy of Management Review, 10(1), 540–557.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ulrich, D., & Barney, J. B. (1984). Perspectives in organizations: Resource dependence, efficiency, and population. Academy of Management Review, 9(3), 471–481.

    Google Scholar 

  • Vachon, S., & Klassen, R. D. (2008). Environmental management and manufacturing performance: The role of collaboration in the supply chain. International Journal of Production Economics, 111(2), 299–315.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Waddock, S. A., & Graves, S. B. (1997). The corporate social performance—financial performance link. Strategic Management Journal, 18(4), 303–319.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987). Our common future. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yaziji, M. (2004). Turning gadflies into allies. Harvard Business Review, 82(2), 110–115.

    Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2004). Relationships between operational practices and performance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in Chinese manufacturing enterprises. Journal of Operations Management, 22(3), 265–289.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Q., & Sarkis, J. (2007). The moderating effects of institutional pressures on emergent green supply chain practices and performance. International Journal of Production Research, 45(18/19), 4333–4355.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., & Lai, K-h. (2012). Examining the effects of green supply chain management practices and their mediations on performance improvements. International Journal of Production Research, 50(5), 1377–1394.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Strategy, Organization & Leadership, EBS University of Business and Law, Gustav-Stresemann-Ring 3, 65189, Wiesbaden, Germany

    Julia Wolf

Authors
  1. Julia Wolf
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Julia Wolf.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Wolf, J. The Relationship Between Sustainable Supply Chain Management, Stakeholder Pressure and Corporate Sustainability Performance. J Bus Ethics 119, 317–328 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1603-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10551-012-1603-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation