How do suppliers respond to institutional complexity? Examining voluntary public environmental disclosure in a global manufacturing supply network

IF 6.5 2区 管理学 Q1 MANAGEMENT
William Diebel, Jury Gualandris, Robert D. Klassen
{"title":"How do suppliers respond to institutional complexity? Examining voluntary public environmental disclosure in a global manufacturing supply network","authors":"William Diebel,&nbsp;Jury Gualandris,&nbsp;Robert D. Klassen","doi":"10.1002/joom.1293","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>When making decisions about their commitments to environmental practices and performance, suppliers face heterogenous institutional logics and their diverse prescriptions for action. How do suppliers respond to such institutional complexity? We examine this question in the context of suppliers' voluntary public environmental disclosures (disclosure). Specifically, our study assembles a unique panel data set of global manufacturing suppliers and their annual contractual relationships with buyers. Building on the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature, we hypothesize that suppliers selectively mimic the disclosure of their buyers by following market, corporate, and sustainability logics. Our study contributes to the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature by indicating that in the context of disclosure, market and sustainability logics both actively shape suppliers' responses to institutional complexity. Furthermore, we find support for mimicry as a mechanism of buyer influence that can lead to disclosure heterogeneity across suppliers even when they follow the same logic, which opens new avenues for research. Our findings can be leveraged by buyers, policymakers, and other stakeholders interested in advancing transparency and sustainability in supply networks.</p>","PeriodicalId":51097,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Operations Management","volume":"70 2","pages":"285-315"},"PeriodicalIF":6.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/joom.1293","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Operations Management","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/joom.1293","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MANAGEMENT","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When making decisions about their commitments to environmental practices and performance, suppliers face heterogenous institutional logics and their diverse prescriptions for action. How do suppliers respond to such institutional complexity? We examine this question in the context of suppliers' voluntary public environmental disclosures (disclosure). Specifically, our study assembles a unique panel data set of global manufacturing suppliers and their annual contractual relationships with buyers. Building on the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature, we hypothesize that suppliers selectively mimic the disclosure of their buyers by following market, corporate, and sustainability logics. Our study contributes to the institutional logics perspective and the sustainable supply network literature by indicating that in the context of disclosure, market and sustainability logics both actively shape suppliers' responses to institutional complexity. Furthermore, we find support for mimicry as a mechanism of buyer influence that can lead to disclosure heterogeneity across suppliers even when they follow the same logic, which opens new avenues for research. Our findings can be leveraged by buyers, policymakers, and other stakeholders interested in advancing transparency and sustainability in supply networks.

Abstract Image

供应商如何应对制度的复杂性?研究全球制造业供应网络中的自愿公开环境信息披露
当供应商就其环境实践和绩效承诺做出决策时,他们面临着不同的制度逻辑及其对行动的不同规定。供应商如何应对这种制度的复杂性?我们在供应商自愿公开环境信息披露(披露)的背景下研究了这一问题。具体来说,我们的研究收集了全球制造业供应商及其与买方年度合同关系的独特面板数据集。在制度逻辑视角和可持续供应网络文献的基础上,我们假设供应商通过遵循市场、企业和可持续发展逻辑,有选择性地模仿买方的信息披露。我们的研究表明,在信息披露的背景下,市场逻辑和可持续发展逻辑都会积极影响供应商对制度复杂性的反应,从而为制度逻辑视角和可持续供应网络文献做出了贡献。此外,我们还发现模仿是买方影响的一种机制,即使供应商遵循相同的逻辑,模仿也会导致不同供应商披露信息的异质性,这为研究开辟了新的途径。买方、政策制定者和其他对提高供应网络透明度和可持续性感兴趣的利益相关者可以利用我们的研究结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Operations Management
Journal of Operations Management 管理科学-运筹学与管理科学
CiteScore
11.00
自引率
15.40%
发文量
62
审稿时长
24 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Operations Management (JOM) is a leading academic publication dedicated to advancing the field of operations management (OM) through rigorous and original research. The journal's primary audience is the academic community, although it also values contributions that attract the interest of practitioners. However, it does not publish articles that are primarily aimed at practitioners, as academic relevance is a fundamental requirement. JOM focuses on the management aspects of various types of operations, including manufacturing, service, and supply chain operations. The journal's scope is broad, covering both profit-oriented and non-profit organizations. The core criterion for publication is that the research question must be centered around operations management, rather than merely using operations as a context. For instance, a study on charismatic leadership in a manufacturing setting would only be within JOM's scope if it directly relates to the management of operations; the mere setting of the study is not enough. Published papers in JOM are expected to address real-world operational questions and challenges. While not all research must be driven by practical concerns, there must be a credible link to practice that is considered from the outset of the research, not as an afterthought. Authors are cautioned against assuming that academic knowledge can be easily translated into practical applications without proper justification. JOM's articles are abstracted and indexed by several prestigious databases and services, including Engineering Information, Inc.; Executive Sciences Institute; INSPEC; International Abstracts in Operations Research; Cambridge Scientific Abstracts; SciSearch/Science Citation Index; CompuMath Citation Index; Current Contents/Engineering, Computing & Technology; Information Access Company; and Social Sciences Citation Index. This ensures that the journal's research is widely accessible and recognized within the academic and professional communities.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信