Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector

Helen Walker
Cardiff Business School, Cardiff University, Cardiff, UK, and

Neil Jones
Alliance Boots, Nottingham, UK
Abstract Purpose Increasingly, private sector companies are aiming to buy and supply products and services in a sustainable way, termed sustainable supply chain management (sustainable SCM), using purchasing and supply to reduce negative impacts on the environment, economy and society. There is often a gap between rhetoric and reality, with companies often accused of paying green lip service to sustainable SCM. This research aims to explore sustainable SCM issues in companies that have been recognized as leaders in their sectors, and investigate what factors inuence sustainable SCM, and how practice might change in the future. Design/methodology/approach Current practice in sustainable SCM and predictions for the future were explored in case studies of seven UK companies, through semi-structured interviews with purchasers and CSR practitioners, and secondary data collection from reports and websites. Sectors included aerospace, retail, pharmaceuticals, and food and drink. Findings Companies were mapped onto a typology of approaches to sustainable SCM, based on internal and external enablers and barriers. Companies were classied as Internal focusers, Reserved players, External responders, and Agenda setters. Predictions for the future of sustainable SCM within the companies were also explored. Research limitations/implications The typology could be further explored through a survey of rms from different sectors, and with rms not seen as leading in their eld. Originality/value The paper draws on contingency theory and existing sustainable SCM literature to develop a typology of approaches to sustainable SCM. The paper draws useful lessons from leading companies for practitioners seeking to implement sustainable SCM. Keywords Case studies, Corporate responsibility, Sustainable supply chains, Sustainable development, Supply chain management, United Kingdom, Multiple retailers Paper type Research paper

Introduction
It is no longer enough for rms to be concerned only with seeking a prot - they should also give something back to society at large, minimize their negative impacts on the environment and have some responsibility for the behaviour of their suppliers on issues such as child labour, health and safety and pollution. Supply chain management (SCM) is the management of a network of interconnected organisations involved in the provision of product and services to end customers (Harland, 1996). There has been increasing interest in recent years in how organisations address sustainability in their supply chains, which has been described as SCM that incorporates the triple bottom line of sustainability. Sustainable SCM means that organisations are held responsible for the environmental and social performance of their suppliers. In this paper we dene sustainable SCM as the pursuit of sustainability objectives through the purchasing and supply process, incorporating social, economic and environmental
The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/1359-8546.htm

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal 17/1 (2012) 15 28 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited [ISSN 1359-8546] [DOI 10.1108/13598541211212177]

elements. Sustainable SCM incorporates a variety of concepts such as environmental or green SCM, where rms seek to minimize negative environmental impacts in their supply chains. It also includes the consideration of social issues in the supply chain, such as ensuring suppliers have decent working conditions, or ensuring goods are sourced ethically and fairly along the supply chain. The economic aspect of sustainable SCM can include buying from local suppliers to support local economic regeneration. Organisations vary in the focus of their sustainable supply chain activities, with some rms putting greater emphasis on green issues and others prioritising social aspects. Organisations face barriers and enablers to sustainable SCM (Seuring and Mu ller, 2008), and these can be either internal or external to the organisation (Hervani et al., 2005; Walker et al., 2008). What is less clear from previous research is whether certain types of organisations are more internally or externally motivated to engage in sustainable SCM. In this research we aim to delve deeper into whether the support (or constraint) for sustainable SCM lies within or outside a rm, and develop a typology with which to classify organisations. Firms differ in what causes them to engage in sustainable SCM, with some rms being driven from within by their top management to engage in sustainable supply issues, and others responding reactively to outside inuences such as stakeholder pressures or customer requirements. The approach to sustainable SCM is contingent on the context and circumstances that the rm operates in. In this study, we 15

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

adopt a contingency theory perspective to explore the approaches that seven large rms have to sustainable SCM. A contingency theory perspective is appropriate in this research because we assume there is no one right way to approach sustainable SCM, and that the best course of action is contingent upon the internal and external situation. The following research questions are addressed in this paper: . How do organisations vary in perceptions of internal and external enablers and barriers to sustainable SCM practices? . How do organisations vary in predictions for the future of sustainable SCM? The contributions of this research are threefold. First, it explores the practices of leading rms in sustainable SCM, providing lessons for organisations seeking to improve their sustainable SCM practices. Second, the paper adopts a contingency theory perspective and brings together existing literature to develop a typology of sustainable SCM approaches, based on the variety of organisational approaches to sustainable SCM, and the best practice case studies are mapped onto this typology. Third, it explores predictions of the future of sustainable SCM within companies, to gauge where sustainable SCM practices might head in years to come. The paper is structured as follows. A literature review follows that introduces a contingency theory perspective and then draws on previous research to develop a typology for sustainable SCM based on whether an organization is inuenced more by external or internal enablers and barriers. The methodology for the study is then presented. The next section outlines the ndings of the study, which are then discussed in the context of the literature. The seven leading companies are classied according to the typology, and predictions for the future of sustainable SCM are discussed. Finally, conclusions are drawn, including implications for practitioners and future research.

Literature review
Theoretical underpinnings: a contingency approach This section sets out the theoretical underpinnings of the paper. In this study, we adopt a contingency theory approach to sustainable SCM. Early proponents of contingency theory include Lawrence and Lorsch, and Burns and Woodward (Burns and Stalker, 1961; Woodward, 1965; Lawrence and Lorsch, 1967). Contingency theory suggests no single organizational structure is inherently more efcient than all others. Since organizations differ in the tasks they perform and environments they face, the appropriate organizational structure is in each case a function of such factors as technology, market, and the predictability of tasks. A contingency theory perspective has been adopted in supply chain management studies (Fisher, 1997; Lee, 2002; Stonebraker and A, 2004; Ketokivi, 2006; Buttermann et al., 2008) and in studies of environmental SCM (Bowen et al., 2001a; Kogg, 2003; Stonebraker and Liao, 2006). This study aims to develop a typology of organisational responses to sustainable SCM, based on perceptions of internal and external barriers and enablers. Literature review of sustainable SCM contingent factors Previous research has identied that organisations can face a variety of barriers and enablers to sustainable SCM (Seuring 16

and Mu ller, 2008), and that these can be either internal or external to the organisation (Hervani et al., 2005; Walker et al., 2008). Internal enablers can be differentiated between broader organisational factors and those specic to the purchasing and supply function. Broad organisational issues include having top management commitment (Min and Galle, 2001) and a supportive culture (Carter and Jennings, 2004; Hughes, 2005). The involvement of employees is also benecial (Hanna et al., 2000) including middle management (Drumwright, 1994; New et al., 2000). Sustainable SCM is also beneted by adopting an Environmental Management System (EMS) (Chen, 2005; Handeld et al., 2005; Darnall et al., 2008). Proactivity in sustainable SCM may lead to rm competitiveness (Sharma and Vredenburg, 1998; Zhu et al., 2005) or help manage reputational and environmental risk (Carter and Carter, 1998; Schwartz, 2000; Hall, 2001; Cousins et al., 2004; Teuscher et al., 2006). Looking more specically at the purchasing and supply function, developing capabilities is important (Jennings and Zandbergen, 1995; Green et al., 1996b; Maignan et al., 2002), and specifying a sustainable SCM strategy is of benet (Drumwright, 1994; Hanna et al., 2000; Hervani et al., 2005), and ensuring it aligns with corporate strategy (Narasimhan and Das, 2001; Day and Lichtenstein, 2006). Other internal corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices can inuence sustainable SCM (Meehan et al., 2006). External drivers come from a range of stakeholders. Large customers may inuence smaller suppliers to meet sustainable SCM practices (Walton et al., 1998; Hall, 2000, 2001), and exert pressure in the supply chain (Handeld et al., 1997). Collaboration with suppliers is important for sustainable SCM (Seuring and Mu ller, 2007; Sharfman et al., 2007; Vachon and Klassen, 2007; Verghese and Lewis, 2007; Vachon and Klassen, 2008). Sustainable SCM can enhance competitive advantage (Forman and Sogaard, 2004; Preuss, 2007). Governments are inuential through policy (Carter and Ellram, 1998; Linton et al., 2007) and regulation (Hall, 2000; Min and Galle, 2001; Preuss, 2005; Zhu et al., 2005). NGOs exert pressure on rms (Hall, 2001; Maignan et al., 2002), as do investors (Green et al., 1996a; Trowbridge, 2001). Moving to barriers to sustainable SCM, a distinction can been drawn between large and small rms, with larger rms more likely to engage in sustainable SCM (Min and Galle, 2001; Hervani et al., 2005). Other barriers include a lack of supportive corporate structures and processes (Grifths and Petrick, 2001; United Nations, 2003; Walker et al., 2008), a lack of management commitment (Carter and Dresner, 2001; Min and Galle, 2001), and a reliance on traditional accounting methods, which do not facilitate reporting on the triple bottom line (Rao and Holt, 2005). A focus on cost reduction can run counter to sustainable SCM (Min and Galle, 1997; 2001; Sustainable Procurement Taskforce, 2005). Looking at the purchasing and supply function, sustainable SCM can be hindered by a lack of training (Cooper et al., 2000; Bowen et al., 2001b) and understanding (Cooper et al., 2000) and having other SCM priorities (Tummala et al., 2006). External barriers include consumer desire for lower prices (Orsato, 2006), competitive pressures (Cooper et al., 2000), and greenwashing (Greer and Bruno, 1996). Government regulation can inhibit sustainable SCM (Porter and Van de Linde, 1995), as can a lack of commitment amongst suppliers (Wycherley, 1999; Walker et al., 2008), and industry type (Min and Galle, 2001; Zhu and Sarkis, 2006).

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

In sum, the literature reviewed in the sections above has identied internal and external enablers and barriers to sustainable SCM. These are summarized in Figure 1. The future of sustainable SCM Previous research has made predictions for supply, but not specically for sustainable SCM. For example, a ve-year forecast for supply shows academics have been making some effort to try to look ahead (Carter and Smeltzer, 2003). Studies have brought practitioners and academics together to try to predict the future for purchasing and supply 20 years into the future (Harland et al., 1999). Predictions for the future of consumer demand for environmentally products exist (Carter and Narasimhan, 1998). This research enquires into what the future holds for sustainable SCM.

Developing a typology
It is apparent from the literature review that a variety of barriers and enablers inuence organisations in their Figure 1 Enablers and barriers identied during the literature review

approach to sustainable supply chain management, and that these can be internal and external to the organisation. As an outcome of the literature review, we are seeking to develop a typology to help classify the variety of pressures and organisational responses to sustainable SCM. Several existing models show how organisations differ in their response to CSR and sustainable SCM, and go through stages from basic to more advanced (Carroll, 1979; Cousins et al., 2004; Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs, 2006; International Institute for Sustainable Development, 2006). In our typology, four types of companies can be observed. Internally focused organisations are more inuenced by internal factors (for example, employee involvement and management commitment). Reserved Players perceive external enablers yet face internal barriers. Agenda Setters are affected by enablers internal to the rm, and are less inuenced by external barriers. External Responders are more likely to be inuenced by aspects from outside the organisational

17

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

boundaries, including customer, NGO, and Government pressure. The framework is presented in Figure 2, with scales included to assist in positioning organisations on the typology, as discussed in the ndings section.

Method and analysis

This study chose to adopt a qualitative approach to investigation, adopting a case study approach which is benecial when the subject of interest is in its infancy (Eisenhardt, 1989), and when how or why questions are being asked (Yin, 2003), which seems applicable to sustainable SCM in the private sector. In this study, an explorative study was conducted in the summer of 2006 based on interviews from seven different organisations, to explore barriers and enablers to sustainable SCM practices. Participating organisations were sought through the Corporate Responsibility Group, a body of practitioners that seeks to work together and share learning on the wider CSR topic. Of the twelve companies emailed, seven agreed to take part. The companies agreeing to participate are described in Table I, and the company names were made anonymous to encourage openness of response from interviewees. Conducting multiple case studies provided the opportunity to increase the analytical generalisability of the ndings (Yin, 2003). Companies were chosen because they had been recognized as leaders in sustainable SCM in their sectors (see Table II). Long-standing work, in most cases going back at least ve to ten years, was evident in all seven companies. Interviews were also conducted with the Chartered Institute of Purchasing and Supply (CIPS) and Business in The Community (BiTC a charity with 700 company members committed to improving the positive impact of businesses on society), to provide professional and expert perspectives. The unit of analysis for the study was sustainable SCM projects or initiatives that the organisation engaged in or planned for the future. Fourteen semi-structured face-to-face Figure 2 Typology of organisational responses to sustainable supply chain management

interviews were conducted with at least one senior manager in each organisation. Interviews lasted about one hour, due to time constraints because of the seniority of some of the interviewees. The participants included ve Directors/ Heads of CSR, four purchasing specialists, and ve CSR or supplies managers. All interviews were taped and transcribed, and participants reviewed a draft case study report. Secondary data was collected from reports and web sites, including annual reports, environmental/CSR policies, supplier evaluation questionnaires and internal newsletters. Triangulation with these secondary data sources was conducted to enhance the validity and reliability of the study (Yin, 2003). The use of protocols is advocated to enhance the reliability of case studies (Yin, 2003), and an interview protocol was developed on the basis of the reviewed literature. Interview questions included: . Please can you describe what your company does in the way of sustainable SCM? . How long has your company been active in sustainable SCM? . Is sustainable SCM activity company-wide? Which function is responsible? . What factors have led to these practices being carried out? . Which factors have been most important? . What have been the enablers you feel have helped make progress? . What have been the barriers or constraints you feel have held back progress? . Looking to the next three to ve years, how do you see the future for sustainable SCM practices? . Will there be consolidation or will there be developments in sustainable development activity; what other changes do you foresee that could affect sustainable procurement here? An analytical framework drawn from the literature review was employed, which functioned as a shell for the gathered data (Miles and Huberman, 1994), with additional categories added based on interviewee comments. The analysis was conducted iteratively through the course of data collection, and the authors independently coded and compared their coding structures to ensure similar themes were emerging, and enhance reliability. The factors identied from the literature review showed a good degree of t with those observed in the case studies, providing evidence of internal validity.

Findings and discussion

The frequency of observations from the seven case studies is presented in Table III. This allowed us to position the organisations within the typology, and assisted us in identifying dominant factors and making comparisons across the cases. However, we retained the richness of the case data by providing examples below of the specic barriers and enablers given by the case organisations. The analysis revealed that most of the themes identied in the literature review were observable within the case organisations. However, some additional themes were identied which are presented in Figure 3. 18

Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Table I Description of participating companies

RetailCo General retailer A leading international pharmacy-led health and beauty retailer A research-based pharmaceutical company operating in more than 100 countries 22.7bn 100,000 Yes, available on web site Yes, detailed supply chain policy as part of 2007 CSR report Not evident on website. Focus is on compliance, supplier performance, and health & safety Yes, available on web site 97,500 38,000 Yes, available on web site 15.7bn 7.4bn 19.3bn 150,000 Yes, on web site A global company engaged in the development, delivery, and support of defence aerospace systems A provider of power systems and services to four global markets (civil aerospace, defence aerospace, marine, and energy) A leading food retailer with interests in nancial services PharmaCo Pharmaceutical AeroCo Defence EngineerCo Aviation and defence SupermarketCo Food retailer FoodCo Food producer A leading nutrition and health company BeverageCo Beverage producer A world leading premium drinks business trading in over than 180 countries 65.6bn 276,050 globally Yes, supplier code on web site Yes, on web site Yes, outlines responsibilities as signatory to United Nations Global Compact 9.9bn 22,000 Yes, Corporate Citizenship Report on web site Focus is on environmental impacts (e.g. researching solutions to climate change) Yes, as part of Corporate Citizenship Report

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector

Description

19
11.9bn 110,000 globally Yes, available on web site Policy focuses on Boots brand products and involved the Ethical Trading Initiative

Annual turnover

Number of employees

CSR/sustainable/environmental policy?

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal

Sustainable SCM policy?

Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

Table II Relevant CSR and supply chain achievements for the seven companies
Company AeroCo RetailCo Year 2006 2003 2006 2006 2004 2003 2006 2004 n/a 2006 2005 2006 Relevant awards and achievements Shortlisted for a BiTC award Winner of two CIPS award Rated best non-food retailer by BiTC and runner-up to M&S as best company Three BiTC awards including for overall CSR work and for supply chain management. CIPS Supply Management Award: Most innovative project and Overall winner Winner of CIPS award Rated best beverage company by BiTC Winner of two CIPS award No awards achieved but joint founder of bodies assessing sustainable procurement and a signatory to the United Nations Global Compact Rated best aerospace and defence company by BiTC Winner of Best contribution to corporate responsibility CIPS award Rated second best food and drug retailer by BiTC

BeverageCo PharmaCo FoodCo EngineerCo SupermarketCo

Internal enablers All previously identied internal enablers were reported by the organisations, with RetailCo perceiving most internal enablers and FoodCo the least. However, several enablers which did not feature in the literature were identied including leadership, and procurements willingness to work with colleagues in other functions. An internal factor not mentioned by the companies but by CIPS, and identied in previous studies (Min and Galle, 2001; Hervani et al., 2005), was organisational size. It was suggested that large companies are often able to do more as greater expertise, resource, and buying power is available. External enablers Turning to external enablers SupermarketCo and RetailCo perceive the most external enablers, and EngineerCo the least. Customer requirements (Carter and Carter, 1998) were raised by all seven company representatives, and CIPS and BiTC. NGO activity (Maignan et al., 2002) as a driving force was raised by four companies (RetailCo, BeverageCo, FoodCo, and SupermarketCo) as well as by CIPS and BiTC. Increasing interest from investors (Green et al., 1996a; Trowbridge, 2001) was highlighted by PharmaCo, SupermarketCo, and CIPS. Government policy and regulation was only reported by AeroCo and RetailCo as driving them forward. This contrasts with previous research showing SupermarketCo to be under regulatory pressure to adopt sustainable SCM (Hall, 2000). BiTC and CIPS recognised the importance of public sector developments for private sector buyers. The public sector in the UK has been particularly active in promoting sustainable procurement amongst public sector buyers (Walker and Brammer, 2009), and this may have had the effect of raising sustainable SCM awareness amongst private sector suppliers. There was evidence of collaboration with suppliers (Seuring and Mu ller, 2007; Sharfman et al., 2007; Vachon and Klassen, 2007; Verghese and Lewis, 2007; Vachon and Klassen, 2008). RetailCo demonstrated a willingness to share purchasing expertise with its suppliers, and FoodCo explained how they work directly with producers (i.e. farmers), something that SupermarketCo also sees as important. 20

Sectoral differences (Zhu and Sarkis, 2006) were apparent as the food and beverage industry organisations BeverageCo, FoodCo and SupermarketCo were all particularly interested in working with suppliers. Other new external enablers include PharmaCo wanting to improve the whole pharmaceutical industry performance, BeverageCo seeking to work with leaders in other sectors, and RetailCo using the Ethical Trading Initiatives standard as the foundation of its sustainable SCM work. Intense competition (Sharma and Vredenburg, 1998; Zhu et al., 2005) was highlighted by RetailCo and SupermarketCo. RetailCo and CIPS both noted how academic involvement such as improving product packaging. Internal barriers Moving on to barriers, a range of internal factors were identied as shown in Table III. RetailCo perceived as many internal barriers as they did internal enablers. SupermarketCo and FoodCo perceived the least internal barriers. Cost pressures (Min and Galle, 2001) were mentioned by RetailCo, and AeroC0 stated how performance targets can tend to dominate other initiatives. Resource (raised by PharmaCo, EngineerCo, and BeverageCo) is linked to cost, whereby these companies have not been able to invest in people or systems to extend their sustainable SCM work right throughout their supply chains so a more focused approach has been needed. Other internal factors afrming previous ndings included a lack of management commitment (Carter and Dresner, 2001; Min and Galle, 2001), a lack of strategy (Grifths and Petrick, 2001), a lack of knowledge on the part of purchasers (Cooper et al., 2000), and an element of organisational reluctance (Greer and Bruno, 1996) that can all limit progress. New aspects identied were resource limitations, and the sustainable SCM process not being robust enough. External barriers Fewer external constraints were identied by the interviewees. AeroCo and RetailCo mentioned none at all, whereas SupermarketCo mentioned the most. PharmaCos observed that language barriers can make it difcult to communicate

Table III Patterns of internal and external barriers and enablers in case organisations (predictions for future in brackets)
RetailCo Pharma Co General retailer Pharmaceutical Total AeroCo Defence EngineerCo Aviation and defence SupermarketCo Food retailer FoodCo Food producer BeverageCo Beverage producer

U U U (U) U (U) U U (U) U U U U

Internal enablers People issues Top management commitment Employee involvement Culture
U U UU (U) U (U) U U

Helen Walker and Neil Jones

3 2 3 5 (2) 1 3 (3) 0

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector

Strategic issues Strategic alignment Risk management Performance measurement Organisational size Functional issues Purchasing and supply function Internal integration Total internal enablers (Future internal enablers)
U (U) U 26 (2 2) 25 (2 3) (UU) U U (U) U U 25 (2 2) U U (U) 24 (2 2) UUU (UUU) UUU (U) (U) UU 24 (2 2) (UU) 22 (2 3)

23 (0)

8 (8) 4 (1) 2 29 (2 14)

21
U UU U U U (U ) 5 (3) 3 (0) U U U U 1 (0) U U U(U) (U) 7 (5) U UU U U U U U U UU U U U U

U (U) U (U) U U(U)

External enablers Government NGOs Competitors Customers Suppliers Investors Academics Media Sectoral Global Total external enablers (Future external enablers)

U U U (U) UUU U

UU

7 (1)

(U) (U ) 3 (3)

U (U) U (U) (U) 5 (3)

2 (3) 4 (2) 2 4 (2) 8 2 1 5 (1) 5 (3) (4) 33 (15) 21 U

Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

U U U

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal

Internal barriers Culture Strategic issues Resource Reputational risk Performance management Organisational size Functional issues Purchasing and supply function Internal integration

26 21 21 21 25 24

(continued)

Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Table III RetailCo Pharma Co General retailer Pharmaceutical 26 22 23 24 21 AeroCo Defence EngineerCo Aviation and defence SupermarketCo Food retailer FoodCo Food producer 21 BeverageCo Beverage producer 22

Total 2 19

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector

22
U 0 1 Enablers 2 6 Barriers (3 Future enablers) U 2 0 Enablers 0 Barriers (0 Future enablers) 0 2 2 Enablers 2 3 Barriers (2 2 Future enablers) U 1 2 3 Enablers 2 3 Barriers (2 2 Future enablers)

U U U U U U 5 3 Enablers 4 Barriers (2 1 Future enablers) 1 1 Enablers 0 Barriers (0 Future enablers) 1 2 Enablers 2 1 Barriers (3 Future enablers)

Total internal barriers External barriers Government NGOs Competitors Customers Suppliers Media Sectoral Global Total external barriers Total enablers and barriers, to position on typology (arrow indicates future direction)

1 1 1 2 1 1 3 10
Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

Figure 3 Additional themes identied in the study

requirements to suppliers in other countries, EngineerCo identied cultural barriers across different locations, BeverageCo has observed different standards in different countries, and BiTC raised the point that international standards are perceived by some to be barriers to competition. Remaining external barriers were only mentioned by one interviewee in each case. Insufcient supplier commitment, only mentioned by PharmaCo, was seen to hold back progress. EngineerCo explained how its very strong brand reputation means that extra sustainable SCM work is not likely to create more demand for its products. Demanding requirements from NGOs were raised by FoodCo, and SupermarketCo felt the sheer volume of CSR information makes it difcult to dene priorities. Dominant internal factors Some of the factors identied in the study were mentioned repeatedly by interviewees and emerged as a pattern across the case organisations in their discussion of present and future issues. The dominant internal themes emerging across the seven case organisations (and the number of times they are mentioned, N X) in Table III include the need to: . support sustainable SCM within the purchasing and supply function (n 16); . align purchasing and supply strategy and CSR strategy with corporate strategy (n 7); 23

ensure performance measures support sustainable SCM (n 6); and devote resources to support sustainable SCM (n 6).

It is encouraging that many of the enablers of sustainable SCM are internal to a company, and practitioners can use these dominant themes as pointers to guide activity in implementing sustainable SCM. Interviewees discussed specic purchasing and supply activities that support sustainable SCM which are summarized in the list below: . Supportive structures and processes within the purchasing and supply function; e.g. Availability of toolkits, inclusion in contract documentation and terms and conditions; inclusion in standard supplier selection criteria; importance of including sustainability criteria in new contracts; assess more suppliers. . Prioritise sustainable SCM with key suppliers, and work with suppliers, support certain suppliers (e.g. producers/ farmers) build long supplier relationships, increase supplier communication, knowledge sharing with suppliers, Keep eye on activity after supplier relationship established. . Ensure other procurement priorities do not compete with sustainable SCM. . Ensure sufcient resource to support sustainable SCM. . Buyer knowledge needed, enhanced through training programmes.

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones
.

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

.

. .

Prioritisation of key commodities depending on criticality of supply and supply continuation. Support for procurement within the organisation. Share good practice in sustainable SCM.

FoodCo: business practice drives work from within with NGO inuence. SupermarketCo : CSR team, customer, NGO, and competitor pressures.

Dominant external factors The most inuential stakeholders and external factors appear to be: . Suppliers (n 8). . Sectoral issues (n 8). . Media and corporate reputation (n 6). . NGOs (n 6). . Customers (n 6). The dominance of suppliers in inuencing sustainable SCM is a novel nding compared to previous research (Walker et al., 2008), which did not identify suppliers as driving sustainable SCM. This may be because the case organisations in this research are fairly well-developed in terms of implementing sustainable SCM, and may attach a greater importance to the value of working with suppliers. The sustainable SCM typology By analyzing the frequency of responses, it is possible to plot each rms current sustainable SCM position in relation to internal and external factors, as shown in Figure 4. The seven companies take their respective positions depending on the frequency of observations of the various factors, which are summarized as follows. Reserved players . RetailCo: strong internal barriers plus customer, NGO, and media pressure. . BeverageCo: companywide CSR targets and work with NGOs and suppliers. External responders . PharmaCo: process and training plus media, investor, and customer enablers. Figure 4 Case organisations mapped onto the typology

Internally focussed . EngineerCo: supply chain personnel recognise importance and employee forum enabling more work. . AeroCo: heavily inuenced by government, yet emphasis on incorporating sustainable SCM within the purchasing and supply function. Agenda setters None of the companies fell within the Agenda setter quadrant. An example might be the Body Shop (Wycherley, 1999), an organisation with strong internal enablers such as senior management commitment and culture. The mapping approach developed in this typology and the list of factors in Table III, can be used by rms in other sectors to identify the barriers and enablers they experience internally and externally as they engage with the sustainability agenda. This contingent approach can help organisations decide the best course of action in sustainable SCM, depending on their internal and external circumstances. The future The second research question led to an investigation of predictions for the future of sustainable SCM, and whether more internal or external drivers or constraints are predicted. When asked about the next three to ve years RetailCo, PharmaCo, FoodCo, and AeroCo suggested that similar work would be going on as is currently being carried out. EngineerCo is likely to be more active but mainly as it is starting from a slightly lower base. BeverageCo and SupermarketCo see signicantly more work being needed. The greater changes predicted by SupermarketCo are due to increasing customer demands, a need to prioritise certain CSR activities, and the growing importance of health debates around nutrition and obesity impacting on a food retailer. For BeverageCo there is the need to be aware of country differences in terms of procurement standards and the need to be able to react to any unforeseen events that could impact on supply chains. Emerging economies are seen by the majority of the companies to include China and India. One area where there is widespread agreement is around the skills and knowledge needed by individual buyers. Practitioners, CIPS, and BiTC alike see a need for purchasers to be more knowledgeable on the whole sustainability and CSR subject and in future to be able to integrate demands in this area into their purchasing practices. Based on predictions for the future it is possible to plot movements for each rm, shown in Figure 4. The reasons for the suggested movements include: . AeroCo: demands from Government but performance focus limiting internal enablers. . RetailCo: increasing pressure from customers and NGOs. . BeverageCo: understanding country differences and more suppliers to consider. . PharmaCo: a balance between internal and external pressures in the future. . FoodCo: desire to be doing more driven jointly from within and by NGOs. . EngineerCo: individuals exploring CSR internally and making proposals. 24

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones
.

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

SupermarketCo: combination of external and internal factors.

The next section goes on to draw conclusions that result from the study.

Conclusions
This study sought to investigate private sector sustainable SCM in the UK, and senior representatives from seven large companies that are seen to be leaders in the subject were interviewed. Our rst objective was to identify the various internal and external factors that encourage or constrain organisations in engaging in sustainable SCM. A contingency theory approach was adopted, exploring different organisational responses to sustainable SCM. A literature review initially identied a variety of internal and external barriers and enablers to sustainable SCM. Key enablers were customer requirements, reputational risk, organisational factors including strategic, people and functional issues, and stakeholder involvement (including NGOs and Government). Barriers to progress included pressures to reduce costs, other organisational priorities, the ability of buyers to tackle the subject, and accounting methods that focus on short term measures. When we conducted the data collection, we found that all of the factors identied in the literature were corroborated as they were mentioned by at least one of the interviewees. Some new factors have been identied for the rst time from the case studies. Enabling factors included a procurement teams ability to work with other areas of the company, buyers abilities to embrace new skills, the increasing role being played by the public sector, academics and investors, and a desire for a whole industry to be adopting new practices. This study has also identied new constraints, including limited resource, weak processes, communication and knowledge deciencies, insufcient supplier commitment, and cultural barriers. The research questions that the study sought to answer explored how organisations vary in perceptions of internal and external enablers and barriers to sustainable SCM practices, and how organisations vary in predictions for the future of sustainable SCM. The literature review led to identication of internal and external barriers and enablers to sustainable SCM, and the case studies conrmed and added to these. We then used the interview data to map the organisations onto a typology of approaches to sustainable SCM, to show how they varied in their perceptions of internal and eternal barriers and enablers. Companies were classied as Internal focusers, Reserved players, External responders, and Agenda setters. Predictions for the future of sustainable SCM within the companies were also explored, with each company anticipating their sustainable supply activities increasing in the coming years. The study therefore met its aim of exploring whether the perceived support (or constraint) for sustainable SCM lies within or outside a rm, and developing a typology with which to classify organisational approaches to sustainable SCM. Implications for practice The companies included in this study are widely seen to be sustainable SCM leaders, and yet variety was found across the seven companies in terms of what inuences them. It is encouraging that many of the enablers of sustainable SCM are 25

internal to the company, which means it is within practitioners sphere of inuence to bring about changes in the direction a company takes in sustainable SCM. First, practitioners could explore the implementation of purchasing and supply activities that support sustainable SCM, as previously listed. There is also a need to be doing more to train buyers in sustainable SCM. Second, the purchasing and supply department needs to ensure that sustainable SCM strategy aligns with the corporate strategy. Third, more crossfunctional working within the company and a need to communicate requirements to supply chain partners is likely to demand new buyer skills. Fourth, adopting a collaborative approach to sustainable SCM seems to be of benet. There appears to be an emerging trend of a willingness to share sustainable SCM practices and experiences across industries, and even with competitors. Practitioners could initiate such sharing of expertise at industry events. The typology is intended to be generalisable across industries and sectors. Practitioners could use the typology and list of factors in Table III to reect upon how they currently engage with sustainable SCM, and how they might wish to change their approach in the future. This contingent approach suggest there is no single best course of action, and that a rms approach to sustainable SCM is dependent on the internal and external circumstances it faces. Constraints of the research The ndings of this research are based on case studies of seven companies already acknowledged as progressive in sustainable SCM, and there is an issue of how generalisable the ndings are for organisations in the UK and developed countries. This research has focused on large rms that are seen to be leading in sustainable SCM, but this will not be representative of those rms that are less advanced in terms of introducing sustainable SCM. In addition, the majority of sustainable SCM studies have focused on researching large rms, and this study is no exception as it has focused on large companies with the resources to commit to sustainable SCM. As small rms make up 99 percent of companies worldwide, investigating sustainable SCM from a small rm perspective would also be of benet (Walker and Preuss, 2008), although it is beyond the scope of the current study. The results of the study may be generalisable to other large rms in developed countries who have already made some progress with their sustainable SCM agenda, and are interested in learning from the practices of rms seen as leaders in sustainable SCM. Implications for future research The research could be extended through a large-scale crosssectoral survey, exploring interrelationships between factors affecting sustainable SCM more fully. Future research could also focus on how sustainability issues are approached in buyer-supplier dyads or in supply networks, in order to encompass the suppliers perspective. In addition, the external factors inuencing organisational adoption of sustainable SCM could more thoroughly be explored from a stakeholder theory perspective (Freeman, 1984). The contingent approach could also be adopted to explore the factors inuencing organisations that have not progressed so far along to road to sustainability as the leading companies included in our research. In addition, more research is needed into the challenges facing smaller rms as they engage in the sustainability agenda.

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

Our attempt to develop a typology aims to contribute to an understanding of how and why rms develop their sustainability initiatives. More research is needed to explore the contingent factors affecting organisational responses to sustainable SCM, and how these factors interrelate and vary in different sectors and contexts, and over time. Overall, sustainable SCM is seen to be of increasing importance and is likely to rise up the agenda for companies, individual buyers, and researchers alike.

References
Bowen, F., Cousins, P., Lamming, R. and Faruk, A. (2001a), Horses for courses: explaining the gap between the theory and practice of green supply, Greener Management International, Vol. 35, Autumn, pp. 41-60. Bowen, F., Cousins, P., Lamming, R. and Faruk, A. (2001b), The role of supply management capabilities in green supply, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 174-89. Burns, T. and Stalker, G. (1961), The Management of Innovation, Tavistock, London. Buttermann, G., Germaina, R. and Iyer, K. (2008), Contingency theory t as Gestalt: An application to supply chain management, Transportation Research Part E: Logistics and Transportation Review, Vol. 44 No. 6, pp. 955-69. Carroll, A. (1979), A three dimensional conceptual model of corporate social performance, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 497-505. Carter, C.R. and Carter, J.R. (1998), Inter-organizational determinants of environmental purchasing: initial evidence from the consumer products industries, Decision Sciences, Vol. 29 No. 3, pp. 659-84. Carter, C.R. and Dresner, M. (2001), Purchasings role in environmental management: cross-functional development of grounded theory, Supply Chain Management, Vol. 37 No. 3, pp. 12-26. Carter, C.R. and Ellram, L.M. (1998), Reverse logistics: a review of the literature and framework for future investigation, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Vol. 34 No. 4, pp. 28-38. Carter, C.R. and Jennings, M. (2004), The role of purchasing in corporate social responsibility: a structural equation analysis, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 25 No. 1, pp. 145-86. Carter, J. and Narasimhan, R. (1998), Purchasing and supply management: future directions and trends, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Vol. 32 No. 4, pp. 2-12. Carter, J. and Smeltzer, L. (2003), Critical strategy areas for purchasing and supply management, Business Brieng: Global Purchasing and Supply Chain Strategies, AT Kearney, London, January. Chen, C.-C. (2005), Incorporating green purchasing into the frame of ISO 14000, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 13 No. 9, pp. 927-33. Cooper, R., Frank, G. and Kemp, R. (2000), A multinational comparison of key ethical issues, helps and challenges in the purchasing and supply management profession: the key implications for business and the professions, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 23 No. 1, pp. 83-100. 26

Cousins, P., Lamming, R. and Bowen, F. (2004), The role of risk in environment-related supplier initiatives, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 24 No. 6, pp. 554-65. Darnall, N., Jolley, G. and Handeld, R. (2008), Environmental management systems and green supply chain management: complements for sustainability?, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 30-45. Day, M. and Lichtenstein, S. (2006), Strategic supply management: the relationship between supply management practices, strategic orientation and their impact on organisational performance, Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 12 No. 6, pp. 313-21. Department for Environment Food and Rural Affairs (2006), Procuring the future the sustainable procurement task force national action plan, London, available at: www. sustainable-development.gov.uk/publications/procurementaction-plan/documents/full-document.pdf(accessed 21 July 2006). Drumwright, M. (1994), Socially responsible organisational buying: environmental concern as a non-economic buying criteria, Journal of Marketing, Vol. 58, pp. 1-19, July. Eisenhardt, K. (1989), Building theories from case study research, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 14 No. 4, pp. 532-50. Fisher, M. (1997), What is the right supply chain for your product?, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 75 No. 2, pp. 105-16. Forman, M. and Sogaard, J. (2004), Organising environmental supply chain management: experience from a sector with frequent product shifts and complex product chains: the case of the Danish textile sector, Greener Management International, No. 45, pp. 43-62. Freeman, R.E. (1984), Strategic Management: A Stakeholder Approach, Pitman, Marsheld, MA. Green, K., Morton, B. and New, S. (1996a), Purchasing and environmental management: interactions, policies and opportunities, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 188-97. Green, K., Morton, B. and New, S. (1996b), Purchasing and environmental management: interactions, policies and opportunities, Supply Chain Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 89-95. Greer, J. and Bruno, K. (1996), Greenwash: The Reality behind Corporate Environmentalism, Apex Press, New York, NY. Grifths, A. and Petrick, J.A. (2001), Corporate architectures for sustainability, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 12, pp. 1573-85. Hall, J. (2000), Environmental supply chain dynamics, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 455-71. Hall, J. (2001), Environmental supply chain innovation, Greener Management International, No. 35, pp. 105-19. Handeld, R., Sroufe, R. and Walton, S. (2005), Integrating environmental management and supply chain strategies, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 1-19. Handeld, R., Walton, S.V., Seegers, L.K. and Melnyk, S.A. (1997), Green value chain practices in the furniture industry, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 15 No. 4, pp. 293-315.

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

Hanna, M.D., Newman, W.R. and Johnson, P. (2000), Linking operational and environmental improvement through employee involvement, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 20 No. 2, pp. 148-65. Harland, C. (1996), Supply chain management: relationships, chains and networks, British Journal of Management, Vol. 7, special issue, pp. S63-S80. Harland, C., Lamming, R. and Cousins, P. (1999), Developing the concept of supply strategy, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 19 No. 7, pp. 650-73. Hervani, A., Helms, M. and Sarkis, J. (2005), Performance measurement for green supply chain management, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. p330-53. Hughes, A. (2005), Corporate strategy and the management of ethical trade: the case of the UK food and clothing retailers, Environment and Planning A, Vol. 37 No. 7, pp. 1145-63. International Institute for Sustainable Development (2006), The sustainable development journey, available at: www.bsdglobal.com/sd_journey.asp (accessed 1 August 2006). Jennings, P.D. and Zandbergen, P.A. (1995), Ecologically sustainable organisations: an institutional approach, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 1015-52. Ketokivi, M. (2006), Elaborating the contingency theory or organisations: the case of manufacturing exibility strategies, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 15 No. 2, pp. 215-28. Kogg, B. (2003), Power and incentives in environmental supply chain management, in Seuring, S., Muller, M., Goldbach, M. and Schneidewind, U. (Eds), Strategy and Organisation in Supply Chains, Springer, London, pp. 65-82. Lawrence, P. and Lorsch, J. (1967), Organisation and Environment: Managing Differentiation and Integration, Harvard University Press, Boston, MA. Lee, H.L. (2002), Aligning supply chain strategies with product uncertainties, California Management Review, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 105-19. Linton, J.D., Klassen, R. and Jayaraman, V. (2007), Sustainable supply chains: an introduction, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 25 No. 6, pp. 1075-82. Maignan, I., Hillebrand, B. and McAlister, D. (2002), Managing socially-responsible buying: how to integrate noneconomic criteria into the purchasing process, European Management Journal, Vol. 20 No. 6, pp. 641-8. Meehan, J., Meehan, K. and Richards, A. (2006), Corporate social responsibility: the 3C-SR model, International Journal of Social Economics, Vol. 33 Nos 5/6, pp. 386-98. Miles, M.B. and Huberman, A.M. (1994), Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook , 2nd ed., Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA. Min, H. and Galle, W.P. (1997), Green purchasing strategies: trends and implications, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Vol. 33 No. 3, pp. 10-17. Min, H. and Galle, W.P. (2001), Green purchasing practices of US rms, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 9, pp. 1222-38. Narasimhan, R. and Das, A. (2001), The impact of purchasing integration practices on manufacturing 27

performance, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19 No. 5, pp. 593-609. New, S., Green, K. and Morton, B. (2000), Buying the environment: the multiple meanings of green supply, in Fineman, S. (Ed.), The Business of Greening, Routledge, London, pp. 33-53. Orsato, R. (2006), Competitive environmental strategies: when does it pay to be green?, California Management Review, Vol. 48 No. 2, pp. 127-43. Porter, M.E. and Van de Linde, C. (1995), Green and competitive, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73 No. 5, pp. 120-34. Preuss, L. (2005), Rhetoric and reality of corporate greening: a view from the supply chain management function, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 123-39. Preuss, L. (2007), Buying into our future: the range of sustainability initiatives in local government procurement, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 16 No. 5, pp. 354-65. Rao, P. and Holt, D. (2005), Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and economic performance?, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 Nos 9-10, pp. 898-916. Schwartz, P. (2000), When good companies do bad things, Strategy & Leadership, Vol. 28 No. 3, pp. 4-12. Seuring, S. and Mu ller, M. (2007), Core issues in sustainable supply chain management a Delphi study, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 17 No. 8, pp. 455-66. Seuring, S. and Mu ller, M. (2008), From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 15, pp. 1699-710. Sharfman, M., Shaft, T. and Anex, R. (2007), The road to cooperative supply-chain environmental management: trust and uncertainty among pro-active rms, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 1-13. Sharma, S. and Vredenburg, H. (1998), Proactive corporate environmental strategy and the development of competitively valuable organisational capabilities, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 19 No. 8, pp. 729-53. Stonebraker, P. and A, R. (2004), Toward a contingency theory of supply chains, Management Decision, Vol. 42 No. 9, pp. 1131-44. Stonebraker, P.W. and Liao, J. (2006), Supply chain integration: exploring product and environmental contingencies, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 1, pp. 34-43. Sustainable Procurement Taskforce (2005), Report by the Capacity Building and, Skills, and Training Work Group, Defra, London. Teuscher, P., Gruninger, B. and Ferdinand, N. (2006), Risk management in sustainable supply chain management: lessons learnt from the case of GMO-free soybeans, Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, Vol. 13 No. 1, pp. 1-10. Trowbridge, P. (2001), A case study of green supply-chain management at advanced micro devices, Greener Management International, Vol. 35, pp. 121-35, Autumn. Tummala, V.M., Phillips, C. and Johnson, M. (2006), Assessing supply chain management success factors: a

Sustainable supply chain management across the UK private sector Helen Walker and Neil Jones

Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Volume 17 Number 1 2012 15 28

case study, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 11 No. 2, pp. 179-92. United Nations (2003), Global compact policy dialogue: Latin American workshop on supply chain management, United Nations, Nova Lima, available at: www.unglobalco mpact.org/docs/issues_doc/7.5/scm_brazil_rep.pdf Vachon, S. and Klassen, R. (2008), Environmental management and manufacturing performance: the role of collaboration in the supply chain, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 111 No. 2, pp. 299-315. Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (2007), Supply chain management and environmental technologies: the role of integration, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45 No. 2, pp. 401-23. Verghese, K. and Lewis, H. (2007), Environmental innovation in industrial packaging: a supply chain approach, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 45 Nos 18/19, p. 4381. Walker, H. and Brammer, S. (2009), Sustainable procurement in the UK public sector, Supply Chain Management: an International Journal, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 127-38. Walker, H. and Preuss, L. (2008), Fostering sustainability through sourcing from small businesses: public sector perspectives, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 15, pp. 1600-9. Walker, H., diSisto, L. and McBain, D. (2008), Drivers and barriers of environmental supply chain practices: lessons from the public and private sectors, Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management, Vol. 14 No. 2, pp. 69-85. Walton, S., Handeld, R. and Melnyk, S. (1998), The green supply chain: integrating suppliers into environmental

management processes, International Journal of Purchasing and Materials Management, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 2-11. Woodward, J. (1965), Industrial Organization: Theory and Practice, Oxford Press, Oxford. Wycherley, I. (1999), Greening supply chains: the case of the Body Shop International, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 120-7. Yin, R.K. (2003), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, Beverly Hills, CA. Zhu, Q.H. and Sarkis, J. (2006), An inter-sectoral comparison of green supply chain management in China: drivers and practices, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14 No. 5, pp. 472-86. Zhu, Q.H., Sarkis, J. and Geng, Y. (2005), Green supply chain management in China: pressures, practices and performance, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 Nos 5-6, pp. 449-68.

About the authors

Professor Helen Walker is Chair in Operations and Supply Management at Cardiff Business School. Her research focuses on sustainable supply chain management, and sustainable public procurement. Helen Walker is the corresponding author and can be contacted at: WalkerHL@cardiff.ac.uk Neil Jones is a CSR Analyst for Boots UK in Nottingham, part of the Alliance Boots Group. He is involved in CSR strategy, reporting, communication, and stakeholder dialogue. Prior to working for Boots, he undertook a variety of roles for The Consortium Ltd, a purchasing and logistics company that supplies goods and services to the public sector.

To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: reprints@emeraldinsight.com Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints

28