Beyond Transparency: Governing Visibility–Opacity Tensions in Circular Supply Chains

IF 13.2 1区 管理学 Q1 BUSINESS
Aamir Rashid, Rizwana Rasheed
{"title":"Beyond Transparency: Governing Visibility–Opacity Tensions in Circular Supply Chains","authors":"Aamir Rashid, Rizwana Rasheed","doi":"10.1002/bse.71614","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Circular supply chains are widely promoted as mechanisms of environmental regeneration, yet they generate a fundamental and underexplored operational tension: The same processes that require high levels of material transparency also create strong incentives for strategic information concealment. Circular supply chain research has predominantly emphasized the benefits of transparency and traceability, while adjacent research on alliances, coopetition, and knowledge protection recognizes that firms must also protect commercially sensitive information. What remains insufficiently explained is how this sharing–protection tension becomes embedded in circular supply chain operations, where the same lifecycle and recovery information can be simultaneously necessary for coordination and commercially appropriate. To address this gap, this study examines how firms manage the visibility–opacity tension through operational supply chain management (OSCM) processes. Drawing on a qualitative multiple‐case study of 32 US manufacturing firms and approximately 80 semistructured interviews, we identify three distinct tension‐management logics. Selective disclosure sequencing governs the timing and recipients of information across the partner lifecycle. Boundary‐anchored opacity recurrently reproduces comparatively stable information boundaries through institutionalized access restrictions. Adaptive transparency recalibration involves ongoing adjustment of disclosure practices in response to changing market and regulatory conditions. Collectively, these logics reveal distinct operational implications and trade‐offs that informants associate with different forms of visibility–opacity governance, particularly regarding coordination, protection of commercially sensitive knowledge, and responsiveness to changing conditions. These implications are interpreted as perceived process‐level consequences rather than independently measured performance effects. The study reconceptualizes transparency not as a governance target to be maximized, but as a boundary to be actively managed. For managers, the findings provide guidance on configuring disclosure practices to balance coordination needs with competitive protection. By theorizing disclosure as a processually governed boundary rather than a transparency outcome, this study shifts the information governance problem in circular supply chains from visibility maximization to boundary management.","PeriodicalId":9518,"journal":{"name":"Business Strategy and The Environment","volume":"26 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":13.2000,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Business Strategy and The Environment","FirstCategoryId":"91","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/bse.71614","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"管理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BUSINESS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Circular supply chains are widely promoted as mechanisms of environmental regeneration, yet they generate a fundamental and underexplored operational tension: The same processes that require high levels of material transparency also create strong incentives for strategic information concealment. Circular supply chain research has predominantly emphasized the benefits of transparency and traceability, while adjacent research on alliances, coopetition, and knowledge protection recognizes that firms must also protect commercially sensitive information. What remains insufficiently explained is how this sharing–protection tension becomes embedded in circular supply chain operations, where the same lifecycle and recovery information can be simultaneously necessary for coordination and commercially appropriate. To address this gap, this study examines how firms manage the visibility–opacity tension through operational supply chain management (OSCM) processes. Drawing on a qualitative multiple‐case study of 32 US manufacturing firms and approximately 80 semistructured interviews, we identify three distinct tension‐management logics. Selective disclosure sequencing governs the timing and recipients of information across the partner lifecycle. Boundary‐anchored opacity recurrently reproduces comparatively stable information boundaries through institutionalized access restrictions. Adaptive transparency recalibration involves ongoing adjustment of disclosure practices in response to changing market and regulatory conditions. Collectively, these logics reveal distinct operational implications and trade‐offs that informants associate with different forms of visibility–opacity governance, particularly regarding coordination, protection of commercially sensitive knowledge, and responsiveness to changing conditions. These implications are interpreted as perceived process‐level consequences rather than independently measured performance effects. The study reconceptualizes transparency not as a governance target to be maximized, but as a boundary to be actively managed. For managers, the findings provide guidance on configuring disclosure practices to balance coordination needs with competitive protection. By theorizing disclosure as a processually governed boundary rather than a transparency outcome, this study shifts the information governance problem in circular supply chains from visibility maximization to boundary management.
超越透明度:治理循环供应链中可见性与不透明度的紧张关系
循环供应链被广泛推广为环境再生机制,但它们产生了一种根本的、未被充分探索的操作紧张:同样的过程,要求高水平的材料透明度,也为战略信息隐藏创造了强烈的动机。循环供应链研究主要强调透明度和可追溯性的好处,而关于联盟、合作和知识保护的相关研究认识到,企业也必须保护商业敏感信息。目前还没有充分解释的是,这种共享-保护的紧张关系是如何嵌入到循环供应链运营中的,在循环供应链运营中,相同的生命周期和恢复信息可能同时是协调和商业上适当的必要条件。为了解决这一差距,本研究考察了企业如何通过运营供应链管理(OSCM)流程管理可见性与不透明性之间的紧张关系。根据对32家美国制造企业的定性多案例研究和大约80次半结构化访谈,我们确定了三种不同的紧张管理逻辑。选择性披露顺序控制合作伙伴生命周期中信息的时间和接收方。边界锚定的不透明性通过制度化的访问限制反复再现相对稳定的信息边界。适应性透明度再校准涉及根据不断变化的市场和监管条件不断调整披露做法。总的来说,这些逻辑揭示了不同的操作影响和权衡,这些影响和权衡与不同形式的可见性-不透明治理有关,特别是在协调、商业敏感知识的保护和对不断变化的条件的响应方面。这些影响被解释为可感知的过程级后果,而不是独立测量的性能影响。该研究将透明度重新定义为一个需要积极管理的边界,而不是一个需要最大化的治理目标。对于管理者来说,研究结果提供了配置披露实践以平衡协调需求与竞争保护的指导。通过将信息披露理论化,将其视为一个过程治理的边界,而不是透明度的结果,本研究将循环供应链中的信息治理问题从可见性最大化转移到边界管理。
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
CiteScore
22.50
自引率
19.40%
发文量
336
期刊介绍: Business Strategy and the Environment (BSE) is a leading academic journal focused on business strategies for improving the natural environment. It publishes peer-reviewed research on various topics such as systems and standards, environmental performance, disclosure, eco-innovation, corporate environmental management tools, organizations and management, supply chains, circular economy, governance, green finance, industry sectors, and responses to climate change and other contemporary environmental issues. The journal aims to provide original contributions that enhance the understanding of sustainability in business. Its target audience includes academics, practitioners, business managers, and consultants. However, BSE does not accept papers on corporate social responsibility (CSR), as this topic is covered by its sibling journal Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management. The journal is indexed in several databases and collections such as ABI/INFORM Collection, Agricultural & Environmental Science Database, BIOBASE, Emerald Management Reviews, GeoArchive, Environment Index, GEOBASE, INSPEC, Technology Collection, and Web of Science.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书