Green Lean and Global Supply Chains

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.
htm
IJPDLM 40,1/2
Green, lean, and global supply chains

Diane Mollenkopf, Hannah Stolze, Wendy L. Tate and Monique Ueltschy
Department of Marketing and Logistics, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA
Abstract
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to examine the relationship among green, lean, and global supply chain strategies as found in the literature, with emphasis on the concurrent implementation of these three strategic initiatives, in order to develop a research agenda to guide theoretically based future research that informs managerial decision making. Design/methodology/approach An extensive literature review is conducted to examine research and practice with respect to the concurrent implementation of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies. Findings An in-depth examination of the literature revealed drivers, barriers, converging, and contradictory points across the three supply chain strategies. Future research opportunities fall into four major themes: the need for theoretically grounded research, the need for a multi-functional approach, the need for a systems approach that adds strategic insight, and the need for integrated measurement application. Managerial aspects are highlighted in the discussion of the metrics across the three strategic interfaces and integrated life cycle management is suggested as a framework for measurement application across the three supply chain strategies. Originality/value Separate literature streams have arisen to address issues in green, lean, and global supply chain management, but research has largely neglected the intersection of these three strategies practiced by multinational organizations. The current research synthesizes the literature addressing the intersections of green, lean, and global supply chain management, and suggests a research agenda to redress gaps in the literature. Keywords Globalization, Sustainable development, Supply chain management, Environmental management, Lean production Paper type Conceptual paper
14
Received March 2009 Revised August 2009 Accepted October 2009
International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management Vol. 40 No. 1/2, 2010 pp. 14-41 q Emerald Group Publishing Limited 0960-0035 DOI 10.1108/09600031011018028
1. Introduction Firms in the twenty-rst century are grappling with a constantly changing world. Three supply chain trends in particular are converging to create an increasingly complex business environment: a move towards green initiatives, the utilization of lean processes, and globalization. The globalization of supply chains involves dimensions such as offshoring of production, inventories, suppliers and customers, and differences in economies, infrastructures, cultures, and politics in the competitive environment (Manuj and Mentzer, 2008; Schmidt and Wilhelm, 2000; Christopher, 2005). Globalization may enable increased revenue generation through entry to new markets and may provide access to suppliers that can provide materials and inputs more efciently than domestic sources. There has also been an increasing trend for
All authors contributed equally to the preparation and submission of this paper and are listed in alphabetical order.
rms to shift operations from the host country to lower cost geographies to reduce manufacturing costs. Lean supply chain strategies focus on waste reduction, helping rms eliminate non-value adding activities related to excess time, labor, equipment, space, and inventories across the supply chain (Corbett and Klassen, 2006). Such strategies enable rms to improve quality, reduce costs, and improve service to customers as traditional batch and queue mass production and supply chain approaches are transformed (Larson and Greenwood, 2004). Lean practices are becoming increasingly difcult to implement and sustain as supply chains increase in complexity and length. Green supply chain strategies refer to efforts to minimize the negative impact of rms and their supply chains on the natural environment. In the wake of concerns regarding climate change, pollution, and non-renewable resource constraints, rms are heeding stakeholder demands regarding corporate citizenship behavior and performance (Sarkis, 2001; de Burgos Jimenez and Cespedes Lorente, 2001). A green supply chain focus requires working with suppliers and customers, analysis of internal operations and processes, environmental considerations in the product development process, and extended stewardship across products life-cycles (Corbett and Klassen, 2006; Mollenkopf, 2006). While there are separate streams of established research on green, lean, and global issues, few authors have addressed the intersection of these strategic initiatives. This is a critical oversight because rms may be missing synergies available through improved concurrent implementation; they may also be failing to address important trade-offs that may arise when there are incompatibilities between strategic initiatives. For example, lean and green strategies are often seen as compatible initiatives because of their joint focus on waste reduction. When lean initiatives enable only demanded volumes to ow through the supply chain (and not the safety stock and extra inventory assocated with non-lean supply chains), a reduced amount of inventory needs to be sourced, produced, transported, packaged and handled, which also minimizes the negative environmental impact of the supply chain. However, lean strategies that employ just-in-time (JIT) delivery of small lot sizes can require increased transportation, packaging, and handling that may contradict a green approach. By recognizing this conict, rms may be able to identify trade-offs or develop solutions that mitigate undesirable consequences. In the example just presented, rms that recognize the negative environmental impact of the pure JIT approach may consider reusable packaging and containers or adapt the lot-size to optimize cube utilization during transportation as a means to achieve both lean and green objectives. This example, while simplistic, is meant to illustrate the potential for synergies and conicts that may arise when implementing any combination of green, lean, or global strategy. Indeed, introducing a global aspect to the lean-green initiatives, adds to the complexity of managing the supply chain, often due to regulatory differences across the globe. Thus, the purpose of this research is twofold: rst, to examine the green, lean, and global supply chain literature, with particular emphasis on the concurrent implementation of these three strategic initiatives. This examination focuses specically on the highlighted areas in Figure 1, which shows the emerging domain of green, lean, and global supply chain literature. This integrative literature review examines the relationship between these supply chain strategies, including their convergence and divergence. This provides a foundation for future researchers to build upon and illuminate the strategies complementary aspects. Therefore, the second
Green, lean, and global supply chains 15
IJPDLM 40,1/2
Competitive environment
Market environment
16
Global supply chain
Environmentally sustainable supply chains
Figure 1. Green, lean, and global supply chains: research domain
Regulatory environment
purpose is to provide a research agenda that addresses gaps found in the literature to guide theoretically based future research that informs managerial decision making. 2. Methodology An extensive review of the literature in each of the three interfaces of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies was conducted using Google Scholar. Google Scholar allows researchers to search many sources, including peer-reviewed papers, theses, books, abstracts and articles, from both academic and professional organizations and publishers. Google Scholar (2009) works to discover the most relevant research across multiple disciplines and sources. Although Google Scholar does not provide all full-text articles, it encompasses information pooled from many different databases. When used in conjunction with a university research library, it directly links researchers to multiple databases through one search engine, including EBSCO Business Source Premier, Elsevier Science Direct, JSTOR, Springer Link, and Wiley Interscience. The development of the keywords used to search Google Scholar was an iterative process. The researchers rst employed a brainstorming technique and then used a snowballing process to add keywords to the search as they were discovered in the literature. These additional keywords were added until a point of saturation was reached, where no new keywords or articles were identied. The nal list of keyword combinations used to search Google Scholar is shown in Table I. All combinations of paired words across the key categories were searched along with the term supply chain. The keyword searches yielded an extensive list of articles (e.g. a search for green and global and supply chain yields 22,200 articles). Google Scholar prioritizes the display of articles in
Lean Push-pull Postponement Six Sigma JIT Green Environmental Environment Sustainability Ecological Global International Multinational Transnational
Table I. Keywords searched
Cultural environment
Lean supply chain processes
order of relevance; therefore, the rst 100 were reviewed for appropriateness. The title, abstract, and text of each of these 100 articles were scanned to determine relevance to green/lean, lean/global, or green/global supply chains. Non-relevant articles were eliminated; however, the authors erred on the side of inclusion until a more in-depth assessment on the content of the articles could be performed. To supplement the keyword search, a list of scholarly journals that routinely publish supply chain-related articles was generated through discussions with experts in the eld. Literature reviews published in these journals that focused on the broad scope of the supply chain were assessed. For example, Hult and Chabowski (2008) recently conducted an analysis of purchasing research. Keller et al. (2002) performed an extensive review of logistics research, and Craighead and Meredith (2008) recently looked at operations research. Additionally, the list of top-ranked journals from the Financial Times was utilized to incorporate general management journals (Financial Times, 2008). A comprehensive list of the journals used for this phase is shown in Table II along with the number of articles scanned for inclusion in this research. The authors determined that only the rst 1,000 articles published between 1990 and 2009 would be scanned for inclusion. A database of all relevant articles from both phases of the literature search was created in Excel. The database articles were classied and coded according to where they best t in the three interfaces considered relevant to this research (refer to Figure 1). These articles were categorized by theory, methodology, scales, ndings, and key topics of discussion. During this review, a number of themes emerged including the forces that drive rms to concurrently implement green, lean, and global strategies, the hurdles that impede effective implementation, and the complementary and contradictory aspects of each of the three strategies. These themes are discussed in the sections below. 3. Green, lean, and global strategies in a supply chain context A growing number of rms have adopted lean processes to promote continuous supply chain performance improvement. Lean processes create value through the elimination of waste in the supply chain (Disney et al., 1997), including the production of goods not yet ordered, waiting time, rectication of mistakes, and excess processing, movement, transport, and stock (Jones and Hines, 1997). Lean supply chain literature highlights the managerial application of lean practices (Manrodt et al., 2008), integrates lean and agile operations (Mason-Jones et al., 2000; Goldsby et al., 2006), takes a JIT approach to supply chain management (Das and Handeld, 1997), and focuses on specic functional areas of the supply chain including lean logistics (Disney et al., 1997). Because of the widespread acceptance of lean supply chain practices and the growing pressure for environmental management, rms have started to incorporate environmentally friendly practices into their waste reduction schema. Firms are pressured by stakeholders to be more environmentally conscious and to integrate environmental management into their processes and corporate strategies ` (Azzone and Bertele, 1994; Kovacs, 2008). The green supply chain management (GSCM) literature has examined the importance of working across the supply chain with both customers and suppliers on environmental initiatives, which has been shown to lead to improved rm performance (Vachon and Klassen, 2006b). This type of environmental collaboration develops knowledge-sharing capabilities (Vachon and Klassen, 2008) that serve as a resource for a sustainable competitive advantage through environmental efforts (Hart, 1995).
IJPDLM 40,1/2
Journals Business and the Environment Business Strategy and the Environment California Management Review Decision Sciences European Journal of Operational Research European Management Journal Greener Management International Harvard Business Review Industrial Marketing Management International Journal of Logistics Management International Journal of Operations & Production Management International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management International Journal of Production Economics International Journal of Production Research International Journal of Purchasing & Materials Management Journal of Business Logistics Journal of Cleaner Production Journal of Industrial Ecology Journal of International Business Studies Journal of Operations Management Journal of Purchasing and Supply Management (previously European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management) Journal of Quality Management Journal of Supply Chain Management Management Science Multinational Business Review OMEGA International Journal of Management Science Operations Research Production and Operations Management Sloan Management Review Supply Chain Management: An International Journal Transnational Corporations Transportation Journal Transportation Research: Part E Total
Number of articles scanned 59 853 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 369 1,000 1,000 393 1,000 972 1,000 1,000 120 513 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 450 152 476 1,000 318 55 1,000 1,000 1,000 586 616 582 432 23,946
18
Table II. Journals searched in Phase 2 of literature search
Firms have restructured their supply chains to operate on a global basis to take advantage of the international product, factor, and capital markets (Manuj and Mentzer, 2008, p. 133). However, global supply chain management can present several challenges, including differences in economic, cultural, and regulatory environments. Global supply chain literature emphasizes the importance of risk management (Manuj and Mentzer, 2008), the complexity and coordination involved in management (Mentzer, 2001), and specic functional areas of the supply chain such as global sourcing (Fagan, 1991; Kotabe and Murray, 2004) and global logistics (Rodrigues et al., 2005). 3.1 The interface of green and global supply chain strategies While the literature base in GSCM is growing rapidly, research focusing on global implementation is negligible, with minimal theoretically grounded research.
Two exceptions include the new development paradigm (NDP) and the sustainability framework. The NDP (Dunning and Fortanier, 2007) focuses on the social, environmental and economic impacts of multinational rms and is similar to the recent introduction of the sustainability framework (Carter and Rogers, 2008). Although the design of global supply chains has a signicant impact on the environment, little research highlights the impact of global supply chains on the natural environment. One exception is the input-output model developed by Albino et al. (2002) that serves as a useful tool for global rms to assess the environmental impact of production processes in the supply chain. Performance measurement in GSCM is discussed by researchers (Hervani et al., 2005; Clift, 2003); however there is little mention of the metrics that rms can use to measure their environmental footprint in a global context. One of the most common global metrics for environmental initiatives is the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) 14000 certication, which requires procedures for identifying all environmental aspects of the sites operations, safe handling and disposal procedures for hazardous materials and waste, and compliance with relevant environmental legislation (Corbett and Kirsch, 2001). ISO-14000 certication is more commonly used among multinationals and these rms also encourage their suppliers to apply for certication. The ISO-14000 standards are also being incorporated into the supplier selection process (Chen, 2005; Miles et al., 1999). Other literature examines the impact of trade on the environment (Frankel and Rose, 2005; Zeng and Eastin, 2007) and the link between green and global supply chain practices and rm performance (Zhu and Sarkis, 2004; Rao, 2002). However, international research tends to address localized environmental issues, neglecting a global supply chain perspective. Several factors lead rms to pursue green supply chain practices in a global context, including common global environmental standards such as ISO-14000 (Rappaport and Flaherty, 1992; Rondinelli and Berry, 2000; UNCTAD, 1993; Epstein and Roy, 1998; Miles and Russell, 1997), policies from corporate headquarters (Hadlock, 1994; Hansen et al., 2004), effects of environmental performance on rms global reputations (Christmann, 1998), cost reduction (Zhu et al., 2005; de Brito et al., 2008; Dowell et al., 2000; Christmann and Taylor, 2001), and pressures from stakeholders (Zhu et al., 2008; Christmann and Taylor, 2001; Maxwell et al., 1997), and competitors (Zhu et al., 2008; Walker et al., 2008). The reviewed literature base consisted of anecdotal evidence (Rappaport and Flaherty, 1992; UNCTAD, 1993; Rondinelli and Berry, 2000) and case studies or interviews (Maxwell et al., 1997; Walker et al., 2008; de Brito et al., 2008), with minimal theory testing. Other factors were discovered that hinder the implementation of a green and global supply chain strategy. Successful implementation of environmental initiatives across the supply chain requires cooperation between customers and suppliers (Vachon and Klassen, 2006a; Bowen et al., 2001). Barriers include resistant suppliers (Wycherley, 1999; Walker et al., 2008), the newness of the concept of GSCM (Wycherley, 1999; Zhu and Sarkis, 2004), the lack of metrics and available data for measuring green practices across a global supply chain (Veleva et al., 2003), and the risk and opportunity cost of losing key partners in a green supply chain (Zhu and Cote, 2004). Barriers were identied from case studies and interviews (Wycherley, 1999; Walker et al., 2008; Zhu and Cote, 2004), anecdotal evidence (Veleva et al., 2003), and one broad-based survey of managers in Chinese manufacturing facilities (Zhu and Sarkis, 2004). See Table III for a summary of drivers and barriers across the green/global interface.
20
IJPDLM 40,1/2
Concept
Drivers Common global environmental standards
Firms create common global standards because of varying environmental regulations, causing increased selfregulation of global environmental performance Corporate headquarters environmental Environmental policies and practices from the country of policies corporate headquarters often trigger global implementation Global environmental reputations Effect of multinationals environmental performance on their global environmental reputations Cost reduction Cost reduction through standardized global environmental strategies; ISO 14000 may have nancial benets through avoiding modication of manufacturing equipment by standardizing global environmental strategies Customers Customers using environmental criteria in supplier selection drive global rms to pursue environmental supply chain strategies in order to be qualied suppliers for foreign customers Non-governmental organizations Pressures from NGOs pushing large global corporations to (NGOs) be environmentally conscious Competitors Global competitors driving use of environmental management systems Barriers Resistant suppliers Resistant suppliers because of costs of environmental improvements, conicting strategic objectives and skepticism of performance of environmental products Newness of the concept Newness of the concept of GSCM; lack of information, expertise and management capabilities for global implementation Data and metrics not available Data for measuring environmental sustainability across a global supply chain are often not available and development of indicators require collaboration with supply chain partners outside of the organization Risk of losing suppliers Losing key suppliers or partners can be detrimental to the environmental impact of the global supply chain and have signicant opportunity costs Christmann (1998) Maxwell et al. (1997) Veleva et al. (2003) Zhu and Cote (2004)
Table III. Summary of the green and global supply chain interface
Denition Citation Rappaport and Flaherty (1992), Rondinelli and Berry (2000) and UNCTAD (1993) Hadlock (1994) and Hansen et al. (2004) Zhu et al. (2005), de Brito et al. (2008), Dowell et al. (2000) and Christmann and Taylor (2001) Zhu et al. (2008) and Christmann and Taylor (2001) Zhu et al. (2007) and Walker et al. (2008) Wycherley (1999) and Walker et al. (2008) Wycherley (1999) and Zhu and Sarkis (2004)
3.1.1 Implementing green and global supply chain strategies. Three points of convergence between green and global supply chain strategies were identied. First, multinational rms have knowledge-transfer capabilities to extend pollution-reduction strategies across global activities, due to their size, high research and development investment and international coordination of manufacturing (Levy, 1995). Second, global rms with strong public reputations are more likely to experience greater external pressure to be environmentally responsible (Williams et al., 1993). Third, while global perceptions of environmental issues in logistics are similar across US, Canadian, and Western European managers (Murphy and Poist, 2003), government regulations in these countries differ. Increased trade in these areas can lead to strict abidance of environmental standards and improved compliance through self-regulation (Zeng and Eastin, 2007). While some factors favor the implementation of green and global supply chain strategies, others hinder implementation. Differing legislation can be either a driver or a barrier, depending on how a rm optimizes regulatory trade-offs. Operations spanning multiple countries face varying environmental regulations; therefore, rms are forced to decide between a standardized or differentiated environmental supply chain strategy (Levy, 1995). These varied regulations and levels of implementation make environmental sourcing more difcult globally (Dobilas and Macpherson, 1997). Also, globalization of the supply chain leads to more pollution production because of extended transportation distances and heightened manufacturing batches (Levy, 1995). Research investigating these conicting points between green and global supply chain strategies includes a United Nations survey of environmental practices (Levy, 1995) and empirical evidence from multinationals in the telecommunications sector (Dobilas and Macpherson, 1997). The literature includes case studies that examine possible outcomes of green and global supply chain strategies (Maxwell et al., 1997; Rock et al., 2006; Wycherley, 1999; Zhu and Cote, 2004). For example, Volvo pushes to make the environment a cornerstone of its product, integrates environmental practices throughout its global supply chain, and has developed a very rigorous environmental training program for employees and suppliers (Maxwell et al., 1997). Similarly, Proctor and Gamble (P&G) has integrated global environmental concerns into their business strategy since the 1980s when super-concentrated Lenor detergent was introduced to meet environmental pressures in Germany. In addition to material reduction and recycling programs, P&G also works with suppliers to generate markets for recycled materials (Maxwell et al., 1997). This integration of strategies and information sharing both upstream and downstream is important for the successful implementation of a green and global supply chain. Undertaking environmental initiatives across a large supply base can be overwhelming. Implementing programs with key suppliers rst allows rms to leverage their support in implementing environmental practices further down the supply chain (Mamic, 2005). Motorolas success in implementing their environmental strategy throughout their supply chain has been dependent on cooperation from key suppliers (Rock et al., 2008, 2006). Researchers have shown that the purchasing function is an important link for implementing green supply chain strategies in a global context (Ofori, 2000; Walton et al., 1998; Lamming and Hampson, 1996). 3.2 The interface of green and lean supply chain strategies Lean supply chain management literature is fairly well developed. However, the rising concern about environmental issues has increased interest in the synergy between
IJPDLM 40,1/2
22
green and lean business practices. The lean process focus on waste elimination potentially includes a decline of environmental waste. However, the causal relationship between lean processes and environmental sustainability has been much debated in literature (King and Lenox, 2001). Innovative rms with continuously improving manufacturing processes seem to be more likely to take on environmental innovations (Florida, 1996), but auto industry research by Rothenberg et al. (2001) indicates that not all lean processes and waste reduction are positively related to environmental performance or pollution reduction. Their ndings, based on surveys on environmental performance and manufacturing performance in addition to qualitative interviews at 17 manufacturing plants, suggest that plants with lean practices have higher volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions than plants where such lean practices have not been implemented (these differences relate to the paint application process). While utilizing spray paints was more cost effective and yielded better quality, the impact of such paint was more environmentally damaging. This research suggests that lean and green practices may not always be compatible. The integration of lean supply chain processes and environmental practices is driven by both internal and external factors. Internal pressures include cost reduction and protability, commodity risk management, and the preservation of a corporate culture (Friedman, 2008; Kleindorfer and Saad, 2005; Kleindorfer et al., 2005). External drivers include governmental (Hansen et al., 2004; Cole, 2008; Kleindorfer et al., 2005), customer and environmental pressures (Cole, 2008; Hall, 2000; Vachon and Klassen, 2006a), a similar focus on continuous innovation and process improvement (Florida, 1996), and the potential for further protability through added customer value (Kleindorfer et al., 2005). The drivers were compiled from anecdotal evidence and benchmarking (Friedman, 2008; Cole, 2008), conceptual (Corbett and Kleindorfer, 2001; Kleindorfer et al., 2005), and empirical research (Florida, 1996; Hall, 2000; Hansen et al., 2004; Vachon and Klassen, 2006a). There are several barriers to implementing green and lean supply chain strategies, including a lack of environmental awareness (Rothenberg et al., 2001), the common belief that environmental practices do not pay (Porter and van der Linde, 1995), and the perception that green initiatives are time consuming and expensive. The barriers and contradictions between green and lean practices were found in research conducted in the auto and trucking industries through empirical and benchmarking studies (Rothenberg et al., 2001; Cole, 2008). See Table IV for a summary of the drivers and barriers across the green/lean interface. 3.2.1 Implementing green and lean supply chain strategies. Lean operations add to competitive advantage through implementing complementary elements of environmental performance (Hart, 1997). One major area of synthesis between green and lean is evident in improvement through the reduction of waste (King and Lenox, 2001; Green et al., 1998; Florida, 1996; Larson and Greenwood, 2004; Linton et al., 2007). Another complementary advantage is that both green and lean strategies require similar methodologies of external auditing and ongoing reviews (Parker, 2008). Also, the lean emphasis on rework elimination requires efcient systems to reduce generation of undesired by-products, thus creating an environmental benet (Womack et al., 1990; Friedman, 2008). While lean practices can lead to environmental benets, inversely environmental practices often lead to improved lean practices (Kleindorfer et al., 2005; Hansen et al., 2004). In practice, the implementation of both green and lean supply chain
Concept Friedman (2008) Friedman (2008) Friedman (2008) Hansen et al. (2004), Cole (2008) and Kleindorfer et al. (2005) Cole (2008), Hall (2000) and Vachon and Klassen (2006a) Kleindorfer et al. (2005) Florida (1996) Rothenberg et al. (2001)
Denition
Citation
Drivers Cost reductions
Commodity risk management
Corporate culture
Government regulations and standards
Customer and stakeholder pressure
Protability
Focus on innovation
In the grocery industry, lean and green applications are driven by cost Lean and green applications both add to a products viability in the marketplace Lean and green initiatives are both driven from the top down within rms Regulations and ISO standards (9000 and 14000) are becoming integral in a rms reputation and corporate image Firms reported that their visibility to customers was a driving force Environmental practices in industry can enhance protability by improving customer satisfaction and loyalty Innovation and process improvement created by lean processes expands to environmental improvements
Barriers Unawareness
Lack of expected prots
Porter and van der Linde (1995, p. 120) Rothenberg et al. (2001)
Cost
Firms with lean practices in place do not strategically seek environmental benets and often do not recognize environmental risks Common belief that green practices do not pay and erode competitiveness Lean processes are often pursued for cost reductions, but green initiatives are seen as time consuming and expensive to set up
Table IV. Summary of the lean and green supply chain interface
IJPDLM 40,1/2
24
strategies impacts functional processes throughout the supply chain (Lamming and Hampson, 1996). Finally, organizations that pursue ISO-9000 quality standards are likely to adopt ISO-14000 environmental standards (King and Lenox, 2001). Some literature has portrayed green and lean supply chain practices as contradictory by nature. There is consensus in the operations management literature that environmental regulations are an impediment on manufacturing processes and efciency (Rothenberg et al., 2001). While lean practices may be compatible with environmentally responsible practices, rms fail to strategically capitalize on the environmental benets that are a by-product of lean processes (Larson and Greenwood, 2004). Rather, the benets are identied solely for their cost efciencies. Firms may be resistant to implementing environmental initiatives because they can be time consuming and expensive (Larson and Greenwood, 2004). Lean manufacturing and mass customization require more setups, which generates more waste and uses more energy (King and Lenox, 2001). Altering manufacturing technologies to make processes and products more environmentally responsible requires a large upfront investment, for which the return may not be realized in the short-term, as it is with lean cost-reduction strategies (Rothenberg et al., 2001). Wal-Mart has recognized that aligning green and lean practices across the supply chain drives the nancial performance of the rm and earns respect from customers (Friedman, 2008). Firms benchmarked by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have seen increased savings by balancing strict lean principles and environmental efciency. Firms such as General Motors, Andersen Corporation, Intel, 3M, and Com Ed have saved signicantly by integrating green and lean initiatives (United States EPA, 2000). Similar examples of compatible green and lean supply chain strategies can be seen in the furniture industry. Firms have identied ways to reuse sawdust and wood scraps, employ alternative technologies to reduce VOC emissions, eliminate rework through increased efciency and utilize recyclable pallets for deliveries (Handeld et al., 1997). Lean supply arrangements demand high levels of information sharing, rapid performance improvements with suppliers and minimal transaction costs (Dyer, 1997; Lamming, 1993). This type of relationship may provide the incentive rms need to bridge the lean and environmental supply chain practices of their suppliers (Simpson and Power, 2005). Improvements in manufacturing systems can lead to direct and indirect benets for environmental management, usually in the form of waste reduction (Simpson and Power, 2005). 3.3 The interface of lean and global supply chain strategies While lean and global supply chains have been studied across multiple industries (Nellore et al., 2001; Levy, 1997; Das and Handeld, 1997; McIvor, 2001; Barker, 1994; Srai and Gregory, 2008) few researchers have considered the integration of global supply chain and lean processes to ascertain where they are complementary and where they are contradictory. Research conducted by Levy (1997) supported the hypothesis that lean production could potentially facilitate globalization. For example, in one international computer supply chain, a manufacturer was able to continue its globalization efforts while implementing design-for-manufacturing and quality improvements two key aspects of lean production. However, other research has suggested conicts between lean and global strategies, such as the fact that offshore
sourcing contributes to longer lead times and more inventories, which is contrary to lean principles (Christopher and Lee, 2004). A number of factors drive global rms to pursue lean supply chain strategies. Drivers include customer demands (van Hoek et al., 1999; Jin, 2004), increased transparency and defragmentation of the global market, volatile demand, the development of information technology (van Hoek et al., 1999), Six Sigma implementation (Christopher and Lee, 2004; Kleindorfer and Saad, 2005; Choi et al., 2001; Bozarth et al., 1998), cost-reduction capabilities (Nellore et al., 2001), and global competition (Christensena et al., 2005). Lean and global research is largely based on atheoretical descriptive case studies, with little attention to empirical studies or quantitative methods. Anecdotal evidence and case study research points to barriers such as the incompatibility in the nature of lead times (Christopher and Lee, 2004), the risk of disruptions inherent in global supply chains (Das and Handeld, 1997), the reduction in economies of scale due to small lot sizes in a lean supply chain (Levy, 1997), and differences in corporate governance structures (Christopherson, 2007). These barriers are often overcome through trade-offs and compromise among lean, agile, and postponement processes in order for global rms to capitalize on the benets of lean supply chains without risking their ability to respond quickly to customer demands (van Hoek, 1997). See Table V for a summary of the drivers and barriers across the lean/global interface. 3.3.1 Implementing lean and global supply chain strategies. Successful implementation of lean and global supply chain strategies is predicated on the benets of close buyer-supplier relationships (Christopher and Lee, 2004; Minner, 2003; Hertz, 2001; Fynes and Ainamo, 1998; MacDufe and Helper, 1997). Reduction of defects and engineering change orders through design for manufacturing stabilizes a supply chain and enables the acceleration of new product production internationally. This higher initial investment allows for improved quality and efciency with global sourcing (Levy, 1997). Additionally, global rms may turn to lean processes within each region of operation in order to minimize costs and increase efciency. Postponement allows for cost minimization through global economies of scale, while utilizing lean production upstream of the decoupling point and agile customer responsiveness further downstream in the supply chain (van Hoek, 1997; Naylor et al., 1999; Christopher, 2000). There are several areas of conict between lean and global supply chain strategies. In fact, Womack and Jones (1996) have suggested that lean production is not compatible with global supply chains. Lean supply chains demand low inventory and frequent deliveries, whereas global supply chains require higher inventory because of longer transit times; this reduces the exibility gained through lean supply chain strategies (Levy, 1997; Minner, 2003; Christopher and Lee, 2004; Das and Handeld, 1997). Lean supply chains also prescribe collaboration and constant communication, which can be difcult to attain in a global supply chain for lack of geographic proximity and language differences (Levy, 1997). Additionally, price pressures common in global purchasing are not dominant in lean sourcing, often creating trade-offs among price, quality, and efciency (Bruce and Daly, 2004; Nellore et al., 2001). Finally, global supply chains traditionally use push methods, while lean is more compatible with pull methods of inventory control. These conicting inventory control methods often create trade-offs (Pyke and Cohen, 1990). Differences between lean and global sourcing approaches must be strategically managed (Das and Handeld, 1997).
26
IJPDLM 40,1/2
Concept
Drivers Customer demand
Increased transparency and defragmentation of global market
Demand volatility
Development of information technology
Six Sigma implementation
Cost reduction
Global competition
Barriers Lead time incompatibility
Offshore sourcing contributes to longer lead times, which is contrary to lean principles Risk of disruptions Global supply chains are prone to more disruptions, while lean requires level supply to ll demands with little buffer inventory Reduced economies of scale Flexible manufacturing through small lot sizes reduces the economies of scale, which minimizes the enticement for global production Differing corporate governance structures Lean approaches that work in one country often do not succeed when transferred in the global supply chain
Table V. Summary of the lean and global supply chain interface Denition Citation van Hoek et al. (1999) and Jin (2004) van Hoek et al. (1999) van Hoek et al. (1999) van Hoek et al. (1999) Christopher and Lee (2004), Kleindorfer and Saad (2005), Choi et al. (2001) and Bozarth et al. (1998) Nellore et al. (2001) Christensena et al. (2005) To minimize the risk of holding inventory, many customers are requesting frequent, small replenishment shipments based on real time sales, forcing even global rms to comply with demands Increased transparency and defragmentation allow for improved communication between rms, which is essential in a lean supply chain Volatility in terms of volume, mix, timing, and place make it necessary for global supply chains to implement postponement and lean strategies to avoid obsolete inventory Technology enables rms to have a degree of control in global supply chains that is essential for the implementation of a lean strategy Used as a lean control tool to reduce variability and risk in transnational processes and increase supply chain security with greater control over global supply base Both lean supply and global sourcing are driven by cost reduction capabilities Driving rms to use lean practices upstream in global supply chains to create build-to-order processes downstream in a global supply chain Christopher and Lee (2004) Das and Handeld (1997) Levy (1997) Christopherson (2007)
However, there is evidence that lean and global supply chain strategies can be complimentary. When lean is utilized as a supply chain strategy, lean production, and lean initiatives such as continuous improvement can be optimized along the global supply chain, whether through localized operations, postponement, or leagile strategies (Goldsby et al., 2006; Christopher, 2005). Firms use leagility and postponement to implement lean supply chain strategies within a global context (Bruce and Daly, 2004; Christopher, 2000; Yang and Burns, 2003; Aitken et al., 2002). For example, a rm in the precision mechanical products industry uses an integrated demand planning system to synchronize requirements for global manufacturing locations on a weekly basis, thus enabling physical distribution in the global supply chain to be aligned with actual demand (Mason-Jones et al., 2000). Hewlett Packard (HP) shifted production processes to t the lean model by customizing the printers in each local market, thus providing a 25 percent reduction in total manufacturing, transportation, and inventory costs (van Hoek et al., 1999). Wal-Mart however, had difculty applying its lean supply chain model in a global context. The logistics applications associated with Wal-Marts success in the USA did not produce the same savings in Germany. Customers in the German market wanted neighborhood stores, which did not work with the lean model used with the large retail format common in the USA (Christopherson, 2007). Although some lean and global supply practices are incompatible, rms have used principles from lean process management to improve their global supply chain efciency (Das and Handeld, 1997). Bose, Kawasaki, and Ford have been successful at combining lean and global sourcing strategies through careful logistics planning, shipment consolidation, and single sourcing with multilingual personnel in key interface positions. They also create separate warehouses for inventory holding to create a JIT scenario, although they have found it almost impossible to have a pure JIT system in their global supply chains (Das and Handeld, 1997). Similarly, Apple uses vendor hubs managed by its shipping rms and foreign suppliers to warehouse parts from all over the world to serve its European operations. This allows Apple to utilize a JIT approach locally while still sourcing globally, saving millions in inventory expense (Fynes and Ainamo, 1998). Other rms in the computer industry use a similar push-pull inventory strategy (Berry and Naim, 1996). While the barriers discussed make it difcult to implement a lean and global supply chain, the quality control and communication principles of lean management prove benecial to the global supply chain if strategically implemented. 4. Synthesis of the literature green, lean, and global supply chains Common drivers and barriers lead to both complementary and conicting points across green/lean, green/global and lean/global supply chain strategies. Synthesizing the literature in the areas of green, lean, and global strategy allowed the researchers to draw inferences about a combined green, lean, and global supply chain strategy. Four major factors motivate rms to adopt some combination of these strategies: cost reductions, customer demands, international standards such as ISO-9000 and ISO-14000, and risk management. Toyota is a prime example of a rm that has successfully integrated a green and lean supply chain strategy in a global setting. Toyotas commitment is evident through its ISO certications and nancial investment into quality and environmental research and development (Toyota, 2008; Womack and Jones, 2005). A lack of consistency in terminology across all three interfaces may arise from a differing focus in multiple disciplines. For example, the lean/global literature and
IJPDLM 40,1/2
28
lean/green literature both highlight the common goal of risk management, but this is not evident in the literature on green/global strategies. Risk management manifests itself as Six Sigma implementation in lean/global and control variability and commodity risk management in lean/green. While risk management is not specically evidenced in the green/global literature, global environmental reputation management is a driver of green and global supply chain strategies incorporated in risk management. An examination of the intersecting drivers of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies revealed three interesting ndings. First, despite the fact that existing literature has highlighted competition as a driver in both global interfaces, it does not surface as a driver in the lean/green interface. Second, although green, lean, and global supply chain strategies each focus on cost-reduction capabilities, green strategies also capitalize on the potential protability from gaining new customer market segments. While the lean/green supply chain literature highlights protability as a driver, it is not specied in the green/global supply chain literature. Third, due to the importance of corporate culture in a lean supply chain, culture is expected to be an apparent driver of any lean strategy, even in a global setting. However, culture is highlighted as a driver in lean/green and green/global supply chain strategies, but is not cited as a driver for lean/global strategies. A similar analysis was conducted to assess common barriers across all three interfaces. Although existing research shows various hurdles to the implementation of these strategies, none of these were common across green/lean, green/global or lean/global supply chain strategies. Two barriers converged across the two green interfaces: a lack of awareness among managers of the benets of green initiatives and a lack of metrics. This is most likely due to the novelty of GSCM. An assessment of the points of convergence across all three strategic interfaces reveals no common similarities amongst the green, lean, and global supply chain literature. Instead, common similarities emerge between two of the three interfaces. The ISO-9000 quality standard has been shown to be highly correlated with the adoption of ISO-14000 environmental standard (King and Lenox, 2001). There is evidence of this relationship across both lean interfaces, but quality improvement has not been explored at the conjunction of all three strategies. Also, literature reveals that rms implementing green/lean and green/global supply chain strategies are using self-regulation in different forms, such as lean auditing procedures or environmental self-regulation. However, government regulation often drives the need for green practices while lean auditing is internally driven. The relationship between internal and external pressures on self-governance has not yet been explored at the interface of the three strategies. Only one common contradiction arose across both green interfaces. Green initiatives focus on reducing pollution, while this is not a priority driving lean and global supply chains. In some cases, the literature shows increases in pollution from implementation of lean and global supply chain strategies, highlighting the need to assess strategic trade-offs. Conicting goals appear to consistently arise in the literature. Managers nd it difcult to simultaneously implement these three strategies. For example, buyer-supplier alignment is addressed differently across the three interfaces. Buyers often focus on low costs, whereas suppliers may incur greater costs while attempting to provide more environmentally responsible or higher quality products.
These differences manifest themselves particularly in sourcing strategies and inter-organizational communication. For example:
[. . .] it is difcult to ask suppliers to engage in environmental practices when the buying organization lacks (or is perceived to lack) environmental commitment and concrete practices. Thus, buyers may need to get their own house in order before requiring the same of suppliers, or vice versa (Gattiker et al., 2008, p. 28).
The lack of commonality across drivers, barriers, convergences, and contradictions may be explained by different stages of development among the three literature streams. Lean processes were initially developed in the 1940s, globalization of supply chains became common in the 1980s and 1990s, and green issues have become pressing even more recently. Lean research is the most developed literature stream, with more drivers and barriers specied in the research. Lean supply chain research may be able to lend constructs and measures to the areas of green and global supply chain strategy. From a theoretical perspective, the GSCM literature is underdeveloped, and even less so in a green/global context. Two recent exceptions discussed earlier work toward developing new theory through conceptual frameworks for sustainable supply chain management (Carter and Rogers, 2008; Seuring and Muller, 2008). This review of the green, lean, and global intersections in the literature reveals that 77 percent of the research published is a theoretical. Of the research, 6 percent is based on transaction cost economics (TCE) or game theory, and 17 percent of the literature reviewed represents a wide variety of other theoretical approaches each used in only one article. Lack of theoretical development may be due to the exploratory nature of research regarding the relationships among green, lean, and global phenomena. 5. Agenda for future research As new concepts are shaped, programmatic research fosters progress in a systematic manner. The intersection of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies has not yet been simultaneously addressed. To encourage research at any of the two-way interfaces or at the conuence of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies, gaps in the existing literature are highlighted as a basis for developing a research agenda. 5.1 The need for theoretical application in research The most frequently utilized theoretical frameworks examining combinations of two of the interfaces include TCE and game theory. As research matures in the intersection of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies, the sustainability framework proposed by Carter and Rogers (2008) can serve as a guide for the development of green supply chains in a lean and global context. The NDP is similar to the sustainability framework in that it is also characterized by social, ecological and economic development objectives (Dunning and Fortanier, 2007). Theoretical underpinnings to both approaches include resource-based view, TCE, population ecology, and resource dependence theory (Carter and Rogers, 2008). Each of these theoretical views provides a unique lens through which the knowledge base on green, lean, and global supply chain strategies can be further enhanced. Green, lean, and global strategies require cross-functional and inter-organizational involvement. Therefore, theoretical approaches that take a more holistic and strategic perspective could be employed to better explain this developing phenomenon.
IJPDLM 40,1/2
30
Theories such as strategy-structure-performance (SSP), the political economy paradigm (PEP) and network theory can be applied to the intersection of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies. The relationship between the strategies and the structures can be explored in different contexts focusing on the green, lean, and global strategies and the ensuing structures of the supply chain. An SSP approach adds strategic impact, which has been lacking in the literature thus far. It highlights the structural requirements in order to facilitate the joint implementation of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies and leads to better understanding of nancial performance from the simultaneous implementation of these strategies. The PEP can be used as a conceptual basis for how rms manage green, lean, and global supply chain strategies (Arndt, 1983; Stern and Reve, 1980; Achrol et al., 1983) because it incorporates both behavioral as well as economic factors and by its nature considers the inter-rm context. Network theory also employs an inter-rm and inter-functional approach necessary to study supply chain decisions (Choi et al., 2001). Supply chains and supply networks are continuously emerging, self-organizing, dynamic, and evolving (Choi et al., 2001). The network view includes explanations about extended relationships amongst actors in the network and is not restricted to a dyadic perspective (Fomburn, 1982; Wasserman and Faust, 1994). Applying network theory to the green/lean/global phenomenon would allow researchers to study this complex and continuously adapting environment with involvement of multiple actors and inter-rm collaboration. Each of these theories provides a unique lens to investigate the phenomenon of interest. Theories employed to date have more of a tactical focus, whereas the suggested theories provide a more expansive strategic supply chain focus. Combinations of the SSP theory, the PEP, and network theory can provide further synergy for the development of a deeper understanding of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies. 5.2 The need to strategically integrate siloed knowledge Review of the green, lean, and global supply chain literature reveals silos in both research and practice. Silo perspectives in research impede the cross-functional and inter-organizational scope needed to gain a holistic perspective of the broader phenomenon. Silo approaches in research also tend to focus on tactical and operational issues, missing the strategic perspective needed to study a phenomenon like green/lean/global. For example, lean research is predominantly focused on rm-level operational issues and only recently has addressed lean strategies from a supply chain context. The research in green practices has been more tactical in nature, focusing on pollution prevention and end-of-pipe measures (Handeld et al., 1997). Research should be more multi-disciplinary in order to address inter-rm decision making. Supply chain research involves researchers from many disciplines. Therefore, supply chain researchers need to step out of their comfort zones and collaborate with academics in other disciplines to further research of the strategic integration of green, lean, and global supply chains. Silo approaches in practice impede the effective implementation of the three strategies, in part because silo approaches alone tend to focus on improvements at the functional level rather than the supply chain strategy level. Purchasing and operations are faced with trade-offs when considering the impact of low cost versus quality control.
For example, purchasing managers attempt to obtain products at the lowest possible price, whereas operations managers tend to focus more on receiving high quality purchased products. Such objectives are often incompatible, leaving suppliers caught in a web of conicting goals. Silos tend to focus on xing problems (i.e. waste, cost reductions, quality, etc.) instead of looking at the strategic picture of competitive advantage. A supply chain by denition (Mentzer, 2001) is inter-organizational. In order for rms to effectively implement green and lean supply chain strategies in a global context, managers must move beyond their silos, considering the entire supply chain and all of its participants. 5.3 The need to develop a systems approach The interaction of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies is arguably present in practice but absent in the peer-reviewed body of knowledge. There is extensive literature on each of the individual supply chain strategies and substantial research in the context of green/lean, green/global, and lean/global supply chain strategies. However, research combining all three strategies has not yet emerged. As environmental regulations become more stringent, rms will be forced to face this intersection. Therefore, supply chain researchers must broaden their approach to understand how rms can best manage this concurrent implementation to optimize the supply chain as a whole. Theoretically grounded research utilizing the SSP paradigm, network theory, or the broad scope of PEP is suggested to enable researchers and practitioners to approach supply chain strategy and decisions from a systems perspective. A systems approach encapsulates the complexity of the supply chain. Considering the number of barriers and drivers to implementing green, lean, and global strategies concurrently, a holistic approach is needed to optimize supply chain performance through adaptive strategies to obtain t for both the rm and the supply chain. In order to achieve supply chain strategic t, rms and researchers should understand how to adapt to complexity and better manage the global supply chain. More research on the subcomponents of the supply chain (i.e. purchasing, logistics, measures, and metrics) should be undertaken to understand how to obtain synergies from the drivers, overcome the barriers, and make trade-offs where necessary. At the current stage of literature development, researchers cannot predict the optimum balance point in determining trade-offs. For example, researchers could begin by further investigating the linkages between ISO-9000 and ISO-14000 in the global context in order to be better able to predict best practices for implementing a green, lean, and global supply chain strategy. The nal part of the agenda discusses methods of investigation for researchers and application of measurement tools for practitioners that would facilitate the implementation of lean and green initiatives across the global supply chain. This agenda item has broad implications for both researchers and practicing managers. 5.4 The need for applied metrics and measurement methods A common theme across the three strategic interfaces is the lack of integrated metrics and measurement methods. Research has examined performance metrics in green, lean, and global supply chain strategies individually at the product or rm level, but little research focuses on metrics that encompass all three strategies throughout the supply chain. Research could address the simultaneous implementation of these
IJPDLM 40,1/2
32
strategies to provide more holistic measures that allow managers to understand the synergies available or to make appropriate trade-off decisions should there be conict across green/lean strategies in their global supply chains. In order for managers to implement green, lean, and global supply chain strategies successfully, practical tools and guidelines are needed that enable data collection for consistent reporting and decision making across supply chain participants. A number of metrics do exist within the individual lean, green and global domains, relating to efciency, costs, and environmental impact. Two challenges must be overcome, however, to provide managers with useful tools for incorporating lean and green concurrently into their decision-making processes: the measurement framework needs to become more holistic and more standardized. Current environmental metrics and reporting procedures tend to be piecemeal and based on what a company can conveniently measure, for example. Just as research needs to extend beyond disciplinary silos, managers need frameworks and measurement tools that enable them to integrate lean/efciency and environmental measures and performance metrics across functional areas within the rm, and even beyond the rm and product levels, to enable more effective decision making across the supply chain in a more holistic manner. On the standardization front, the ISO-9000 family of standards provides guidelines for quality management systems to help rms achieve desired quality requirements and enhance customer-supplier relationships (Guler et al., 2002); environmental management systems are often predicated on the ISO-14000 family of standards and guidelines (Corbett and Kirsch, 2001). Guidelines that focus on environmental performance evaluation provide a basis for measuring and monitoring a rms impact on the environment (e.g. tons of CO2 emissions per year, contaminant concentration in wastewater, and number of regulatory nes per year). The current interest in carbon footprinting as but one environmental performance measure (Gattiker et al., 2008), addresses an individual component of a broader environmental management system but lack of standards in data collection procedures and standard assumptions in metrics makes these measurement techniques challenging. Wal-Marts recent announcement of an environmental labeling program for the products it carries may provide the impetus for standardization in measuring and reporting the environmental impact of many consumer products (Bustillo, 2009), going beyond single issue metrics. While the details of Wal-Marts initiative are still unknown, the need for standardization in measuring and reporting environmental impact of a rms products cannot be underestimated. As legislation and market demands around the world escalate regarding environmental performance, measures and metrics need to be standardized, to allow global entities to measure their performance across multiple operating arenas with a level of consistency that holds up for internal decision making as well as to external scrutiny. Standardized metrics and performance measures also provide an important base for shifting from ad hoc, static performance indicators towards systems of continuous improvement over time. An integrated life cycle management (ILCM) approach may provide the framework to bind green, lean, and global decisions more strategically across a rm and across its supply chains. The ILCM approach involves integrating efciency and environmental sustainability into rms decisions, optimizing costs, and minimizing the environmental impact caused by the product from cradle to grave (Linnanen et al., 1995; Wolters et al., 1997). Importantly, ILCM represents a systematic management process that supports
decision making across time and across supply chain echelons. A measurement approach across time and across the supply chain is important because decisions made at the product design stage in one part of the supply chain, for example, can have important implications for both efciency (lean) and environmental (green) performance at another echelon within the supply chain, or at a different point in time (e.g. carbon footprint at point of production should not be considered separately from carbon footprint at point of use, which may occur in very different places and at very different times). Established efciency metrics used for measuring and monitoring lean processes across a global supply chain become an important component of an ILCM approach. Likewise, existing environmental metrics such as life cycle assessment (LCA) and life cycle costing (LCC) need to be incorporated into an ILCM approach. LCA focuses primarily on environmental metrics (Frankl and Rubik, 2000) at the product level. LCC provides an economic piece to understanding environmental performance by quantifying costs across the life cycle of a product (Asiedu and Gu, 1998). Both LCA and LCC provide important environmental measurement approaches, but focus at the product level and typically neglect global supply chain implications. Finally, strategic global supply chain decisions are increasingly inuenced by social considerations. An ILCM system could incorporate the necessary social metrics using social life cycle assessment (SLCA) as a starting point (Brent and Labuschagne, 2005). These social measures inuence green as well as lean strategies. Consider for example the location of suppliers, availability of labor and clean water, wage rates and working conditions. All of these factors inuence the availability of inventory, the location and quality of inventory, and the accessibility of suppliers. ILCM is gaining interest in practice (Caterpillar, 2008; Toyota, 2008) but needs further theory development and testing by researchers. Researchers need to better understand how to incorporate ILCM metrics across multiple geographies and supply chains. The resulting knowledge would ultimately provide supply chain managers consistent and cohesive tools with standardized approaches that allow for better decision making. These tools would also help to minimize the conict across green/lean/global strategies and help managers capitalize on synergistic areas across supply chain decisions that are often measured independently but implemented in parallel. 6. Conclusions There are several limitations to this research. Searches conducted using Google Scholar have potential for slight variation. Literature is continuously being published and therefore added to the base of existing knowledge. This research was conducted at a single point in time, utilizing only the articles then available. The continuous growth of research in this area is indicative of a developing phenomenon and shows much future research potential. Another limitation relates to the external operating factors considered to be beyond the scope of the current research. Future research could examine the inuence of the external environment on the intersection of green, lean, and global supply chain strategies, with respect to regulation, trade barriers, and government intervention. There is also signicant opportunity to examine the role of corporate culture in the green, lean, and global supply chain. In spite of the limitations, this research makes several contributions to the body of supply chain management knowledge. This is the rst attempt at synthesizing the
IJPDLM 40,1/2
34
literature on green, lean, and global supply chain strategies. The literature is replete with discussion on the individual strategies, but has thus far not addressed how rms can implement these strategies concurrently. A thorough examination of the individual bodies of literature was used as a means to guide future research at the intersection of green/lean/global supply chain strategies. The future research agenda addresses gaps in the current literature, and suggests several theoretical lenses from which to explore this phenomenon. The agenda presented in this paper allows for future research that begins to meet the call for more theoretical research in supply chain management literature (Flint et al., 2005; Mentzer and Kahn, 1995). The fact that green, lean, and global strategies have not been researched concurrently is not surprising given the inherent contradictions. Although some strategies do not seem naturally synergistic, the benets gained by understanding the trade-offs and optimization possible could lead to future performance enhancement. The advantages of a broad perspective of these three supply chain strategies can serve researchers and managers alike. From a theoretical perspective, we suggest three theoretical lenses through which to examine this emerging phenomenon; each approach would allow researchers to take the systems approach necessary to understand the concurrent implementation of green and lean supply chain strategies in a global context. Further theoretically grounded research will allow academics to begin to predict the best methods of implementation for managers seeking to optimize on the synergies of these three supply chain strategies. From a managerial perspective, creating an awareness of the synergies and conicts between and among these three strategies will allow for more effective decision making. Also, managers need to actively participate in the development and application of metrics and standards that facilitate integrated, holistic decision making within their rms and across their supply chains. As the world market becomes increasingly homogenized, green supply chain practices will continue to be an opportunity for rms to maximize lean quality improvements and performance while staying competitive in a complex global supply chain system.
References Achrol, R.S., Reve, T. and Stern, L.W. (1983), The environment of marketing channel dyads: a framework for comparative analysis, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 55-67. Aitken, J., Christopher, M. and Towill, D. (2002), Understanding, implementing and exploiting agility and leanness, International Journal of Logistics: Research & Applications, Vol. 5, pp. 59-74. Albino, V., Izzo, C. and Kuhtz, S. (2002), Input-output models for the analysis of a local/global supply chain, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 78 No. 2, pp. 119-31. Arndt, J. (1983), The political economy paradigm: foundation for theory building in marketing, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 47 No. 4, pp. 44-54. Asiedu, Y. and Gu, P. (1998), Product life cycle cost analysis: state of the art review, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 883-908. ` Azzone, G. and Bertele, U. (1994), Exploiting green strategies for competitive advantage, Long Range Planning, Vol. 27 No. 6, pp. 69-81. Barker, R.C. (1994), The design of lean manufacturing systems using time-based analysis, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 14 No. 11, pp. 86-96.
Berry, D. and Naim, M.M. (1996), Quantifying the relative improvements of redesign strategies in a P.C. supply chain, International Journal of Production Economics, Vols 46-47 No. 3, pp. 181-96. Bowen, F.E., Cousins, P.D., Lamming, R.C. and Faruk, A.C. (2001), The role of supply management capabilities in green supply, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 174-89. Bozarth, C., Handeld, R. and Das, A. (1998), Stages of global sourcing strategy evolution: an exploratory study, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 16 Nos 2/3, pp. 241-55. Brent, A. and Labuschagne, C. (2005), Sustainable life cycle management: a case study in the process industry to develop a calculation procedure for social indicators following conventional LCA methods, paper presented at 4th Australian LCA Conference, Sydney. Bruce, M. and Daly, L. (2004), Lean or agile: a solution for supply chain management in the textiles and clothing industry?, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 24 No. 2, pp. 151-70. Bustillo, M. (2009), Wal-Mart puts green movement into stores, The Wall Street Journal, July 16, pp. A1-A10. Carter, C.R. and Rogers, D.S. (2008), A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 38 No. 5, pp. 360-87. Caterpillar (2008), 2008 Sustainability Report, available at: www.cat.com/cda/les/1401995/7/ Cat_08SR_e_only.pdf (accessed July 28, 2009). Chen, C. (2005), Incorporating green purchasing into the frame of ISO 14000, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 13 No. 9, pp. 927-33. Choi, T.Y., Dooley, K.J. and Rungtusanatham, M. (2001), Supply networks and complex adaptive systems: control versus emergence, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 19 No. 3, pp. 351-66. Christensena, W.J., Germain, R. and Birou, L. (2005), Build-to-order and just-in-time as predictors of applied supply chain knowledge and market performance, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 23 No. 5, pp. 470-81. Christmann, P. (1998), Environmental strategies of multinational chemical companies: global integration or national responsiveness?, working paper, The Anderson School at UCLA, University of California Los Angeles, Los Angeles, CA. Christmann, P. and Taylor, G. (2001), Globalization and the environment: determinants of rm self-regulation in China, Journal of International Business Studies, Vol. 32 No. 3, pp. 439-58. Christopher, M. (2000), The agile supply chain: competing in volatile markets, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 37-44. Christopher, M. (2005), Logistics & Supply Chain Management: Creating Value-Adding Networks, 3rd ed., Pearson Education, Harlow. Christopher, M. and Lee, H. (2004), Mitigating supply chain risk through improved condence, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 34 No. 5, pp. 388-96. Christopherson, S. (2007), Barriers to US style lean retailing: the case of Wal-Marts failure in Germany, Journal of Economic Geography, Vol. 7, pp. 451-69. Clift, R. (2003), Metrics for supply chain sustainability, Clean Technologies and Environmental Policy, Vol. 5 No. 3, pp. 240-7.
IJPDLM 40,1/2
36
Cole, L. (2008), Keen to be green, Road Transport, May 22, available at: www.roadtransport. com/Articles/2008/05/22/130767/keen-to-be-green.html (accessed January 17, 2009). Corbett, C.J. and Kirsch, D.A. (2001), International diffusion of ISO 14000 certication, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 327-42. Corbett, C.J. and Klassen, R.D. (2006), Extending the horizons: environmental excellence as key to improving operations, Manufacturing & Service Operations Management, Vol. 8 No. 1, pp. 5-22. Corbett, C.J. and Kleindorfer, P. (2001), Environmental management and operations management: introduction to Part 1, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 10 No. 2, pp. 107-11. Craighead, C. and Meredith, J. (2008), Operations management research: evolution and alternative future paths, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 28 No. 8, pp. 710-26. Das, A. and Handeld, R.B. (1997), Just-in-time and logistics in global sourcing: an empirical study, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 27 Nos 3/4, pp. 244-59. de Brito, M.P., Carbone, V. and Blanquart, C.M. (2008), Towards a sustainable fashion retail supply chain in Europe: organisation and performance, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 114 No. 2, pp. 534-53. de Burgos Jimenez, J. and Cespedes Lorente, J.J. (2001), Environmental performance as an operations objective, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 No. 12, pp. 1553-72. Disney, S.M., Naim, M.M. and Towill, D.R. (1997), Dynamic simulation modeling for lean logistics, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 27 Nos 3/4, pp. 174-96. Dobilas, G. and Macpherson, A. (1997), Environmental regulation and international sourcing, Growth and Change, Vol. 28 No. 1, pp. 7-23. Dowell, G., Hart, S. and Yeung, B. (2000), Do corporate global environmental standards create or destroy market value?, Management Science, Vol. 46 No. 8, pp. 1059-74. Dunning, J. and Fortanier, F. (2007), Multinational enterprises and the new development paradigm: consequences for host country development, Multinational Business Review, Vol. 15 No. 1, pp. 25-45. Dyer, J.H. (1997), Effective interim collaboration: how rms minimize transaction costs and maximize transaction value, Strategic Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 7, pp. 535-56. Epstein, M. and Roy, M. (1998), Managing corporate environmental performance: a multinational perspective, European Management Journal, Vol. 16 No. 3, pp. 284-96. Fagan, M.L. (1991), A guide to global sourcing, Journal of Business Strategy, Vol. 12 No. 2, pp. 21-5. Financial Times (2008), Financial Times journal list, available at: http://bear.cba.u.edu/ centers/MKS/marketing%20science/list.pdf (accessed May 28). Flint, D., Larsson, E., Gammelgaard, B. and Mentzer, J. (2005), Logistics innovation: a customer value-oriented social process, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 1, pp. 113-47. Florida, R. (1996), Lean and green: the move to environmentally conscious manufacturing, California Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 1, pp. 80-105. Fomburn, C.J. (1982), Strategies for network research in organizations, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 280-91.
Frankel, J.A. and Rose, A.K. (2005), Is trade good or bad for the environment? Sorting out the causality, Review of Economics & Statistics, Vol. 87 No. 1, pp. 85-91. Frankl, P. and Rubik, F. (2000), Life Cycle Assessment in Industry and Business: Adoption Patterns, Applications and Implications, Springer, Heidelberg. Friedman, P. (2008), Leaning toward green: green your supply chain with lean practices, available at: http://outsourced-logistics.com/operations_strategy/leaning_toward_green _1108/index.html (accessed December 23, 2008). Fynes, B. and Ainamo, A. (1998), Organisational learning and lean supply relationships: the case of Apple Ireland, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 96-107. Gattiker, T.F., Tate, W.L. and Carter, C.R. (2008), Focus study: supply managements strategic role in environmental practices, available at: www.capsresearch.org (accessed February 11, 2009). Goldsby, T.J., Grifs, S.E. and Roath, A.S. (2006), Modeling lean, agile, and leagile supply chain strategies, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 27 No. 1, pp. 57-80. Google Scholar (2009), About Google Scholar, available at: http://scholar.google.com/intl/en/ scholar/about.html (accessed July 7, 2009). Green, K., Morton, B. and New, S. (1998), Green purchasing and supply policies: do they improve companies environmental performance?, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 3 No. 2, pp. 89-95. Guler, I., Guillen, M. and Macpherson, J. (2002), Global competition, institutions, and the diffusion of organizational practices: the international spread of ISO 9000 quality certicates, Administrative Science Quarterly, Vol. 47, pp. 207-32. Hadlock, C.R. (1994), Multinational corporations and the transfer of environmental technology to developing countries, International Environmental Affairs, Vol. 6 No. 2, pp. 149-74. Hall, J. (2000), Environmental supply chain dynamics, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 8 No. 6, pp. 455-71. Handeld, R.B., 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. Hansen, J.D., Melnyk, S.A. and Calantone, R. (2004), Core values and environmental management: a strong inference approach, Greener Management International, Vol. 46, pp. 29-40. Hart, S.L. (1995), A natural resource-based view of the rm, Academy of Management Review, Vol. 20 No. 4, pp. 986-1014. Hart, S.L. (1997), Beyond greening: strategies for a sustainable world, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 75, pp. 66-77. Hertz, S. (2001), Dynamics of alliances in highly integrated supply chain networks, International Journal of Logistics: Research & Applications, Vol. 4 No. 2, pp. 237-56. Hervani, A.A., Helms, M.M. and Sarkis, J. (2005), Performance measurement for green supply chain management, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 12 No. 4, pp. 330-53. Hult, G. and Chabowski, B. (2008), Sourcing research as an intellectual network of ideas, Decision Sciences, Vol. 39 No. 3, pp. 323-35. Jin, B. (2004), Achieving an optimal global versus domestic sourcing balances under demand uncertainty, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 24 No. 12, pp. 1292-305.
IJPDLM 40,1/2
38
Jones, D.T. and Hines, P. (1997), Lean logistics, International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, Vol. 27 Nos 3/4, p. 153. Keller, S., Savitskie, K., Stank, T., Lynch, D. and Ellinger, A. (2002), A summary and analysis of multi-item scales used in logistics research, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 23 No. 2, pp. 83-281. King, A. and Lenox, M. (2001), Lean and green? An empirical examination of the relationship between lean production and environmental performance, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 244-56. Kleindorfer, P.R. and Saad, G. (2005), Managing disruption risks in supply chains, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 14 No. 1, pp. 53-68. Kleindorfer, P.R., Singhal, K. and van Wassenhove, L.N. (2005), Sustainable operations management, Production & Operations Management, Vol. 14, pp. 482-92. Kotabe, M. and Murray, J.Y. (2004), Global sourcing strategy and sustainable competitive advantage, Industrial Marketing Management, Vol. 33 No. 1, pp. 7-14. cs, G. (2008), Corporate environmental responsibility in the supply chain, Journal of Kova Cleaner Production, Vol. 16 No. 15, pp. 1571-8. Lamming, R. (1993), Beyond Partnership: Strategies for Innovation and Lean Supply, Prentice-Hall, New York, NY. Lamming, R. and Hampson, J. (1996), The environment as a supply chain management issue, British Journal of Management, Vol. 7 No. 1, pp. S45-S62 (special issue). Larson, T. and Greenwood, R. (2004), Perfect complements: synergies between lean production and eco-sustainability initiatives, Environmental Quality Management, Vol. 13 No. 4, pp. 27-36. Levy, D. (1995), The environmental practices and performance of transnational corporations, Transnational corporations, Vol. 41, pp. 44-67. Levy, D. (1997), Lean production in an international supply chain, Sloan Management Review, Vol. 38 No. 2, pp. 94-102. Linnanen, L., Bostrom, T. and Miettinen, P. (1995), Life cycle management: integrated approach towards corporate environmental issues, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 4 No. 3, pp. 117-27. 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. McIvor, R. (2001), Lean supply: the design and cost reduction dimensions, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 7 No. 4, pp. 227-42. MacDufe, J. and Helper, S. (1997), Creating lean suppliers: the Honda way, California Management Review, Vol. 39 No. 4, pp. 118-51. Mamic, I. (2005), Managing global supply chain: the sports footwear, apparel and retail sectors, Journal of Business Ethics, Vol. 59 No. 1, pp. 81-100. Manrodt, K.B., Vitasek, K. and Thompson, R. (2008), Putting lean to work, Logistics Management, Vol. 47 No. 8, pp. 74-7. Manuj, I. and Mentzer, J.T. (2008), Global supply chain risk management, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 29 No. 1, pp. 133-55. Mason-Jones, R., Naylor, B. and Towill, D. (2000), Lean, agile or leagile? Matching your supply chain to the marketplace, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 38 No. 17, pp. 4061-70.
Maxwell, J., Rothenberg, S., Briscoe, F. and Marcus, A. (1997), Green schemes: corporate environmental strategies and their implementation, California Management Review, Vol. 39, pp. 118-34. Mentzer, J.T. (Ed.) (2001), Supply Chain Management, Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. Mentzer, J.T. and Kahn, K. (1995), A framework of logistics research, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 16 No. 1, pp. 231-51. Miles, M. and Russell, G. (1997), ISO 14000 total quality environmental management: the integration of environmental marketing, total quality management, and corporate environmental policy, Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 2 No. 1, pp. 151-68. Miles, M.P., Munilla, L.S. and Mcclurg, T. (1999), The impact of ISO 14000 environmental management standards on small and medium sized enterprises, Journal of Quality Management, Vol. 4 No. 1, pp. 111-22. Minner, S. (2003), Multiple-supplier inventory models in supply chain management: a review, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 81-82, pp. 265-79. Mollenkopf, D.A. (2006), Environmental Sustainability: Examining the Case for Environmentally-sustainable Supply Chains, Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals, Lombard, IL. Murphy, P.R. and Poist, R.F. (2003), Green perspectives and practices: a comparative logistics study, Supply Chain Management, Vol. 8 No. 2, pp. 122-31. Naylor, J.B., Naim, M.M. and Berry, D. (1999), Leagility: integrating the lean and agile manufacturing paradigms in the total supply chain, International Journal of Production Economics, Vol. 62 Nos 1/2, pp. 107-18. Nellore, R., Chanaron, J.J. and Eric Soderquist, K. (2001), Lean supply and price-based global sourcing the interconnection, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 7 No. 2, pp. 101-10. Ofori, G. (2000), Greening the construction supply chain in Singapore, European Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 6 Nos 3/4, pp. 195-206. Parker, D. (2008), Holdens drive for green, lean supply chains, Manufactures Monthly, November, p. 16. Porter, M.E. and van der Linde, C. (1995), Green and competitive: ending the stalemate, Harvard Business Review, Vol. 73, pp. 120-34. Pyke, D.F. and Cohen, M.A. (1990), Push and pull in manufacturing and distribution systems, Journal of Operations Management, Vol. 9 No. 1, pp. 24-43. Rao, P. (2002), Greening the supply chain: a new initiative in South East Asia, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 22 No. 6, pp. 631-55. Rappaport, A. and Flaherty, M.F. (1992), Corporate Responses to Environmental Challenges: Initiatives by Multinational Management, Quorum Books, New York, NY. Rock, M., Angel, D.P. and Pao Li, L. (2006), Impact of rm-based environmental standards on subsidiaries and their suppliers: evidence from Motorola-Penang, Journal of Industrial Ecology, Vol. 10, pp. 257-78. Rock, M., Murphy, J.T., Rasiah, R., van Seters, P. and Managi, S. (2008), A hard slog, not a leap frog: globalization and sustainability transitions in developing Asia, Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Vol. 76 No. 2, pp. 241-55. Rodrigues, A., Bowersox, D. and Calantone, R. (2005), Estimation of global and national logistics expenditures: 2002 data update, Journal of Business Logistics, Vol. 26 No. 2, pp. 1-15.
IJPDLM 40,1/2
Rondinelli, D.A. and Berry, M.A. (2000), Environmental citizenship in multinational corporations: social responsibility and sustainable development, European Management Journal, Vol. 18 No. 1, pp. 70-84. Rothenberg, S., Pil, F. and Maxwell, J. (2001), Lean, green, and the quest for environmental performance, Production and Operations Management, Vol. 10 No. 3, pp. 228-43.
40
Sarkis, J. (2001), Manufacturings role in corporate environmental sustainability, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 21 Nos 5/6, pp. 666-86. Schmidt, G. and Wilhelm, W.E. (2000), Strategic, tactical and operational decisions in multi-national logistics networks: a review and discussion of modelling issues, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 38 No. 7, pp. 1501-23. Seuring, S. and Muller, 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. Simpson, D.F. and Power, D.J. (2005), Use the supply relationship to develop lean and green suppliers, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 10 No. 1, pp. 60-8. Srai, J.S. and Gregory, M. (2008), A supply network conguration perspective on international supply chain development, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 28 No. 5, pp. 386-411. Stern, L. and Reve, T. (1980), Distribution channels as political economies: a framework for comparative analysis, The Journal of Marketing, Vol. 44 No. 3, pp. 52-64. Toyota (2008), 2008 North America Environmental Report: Challenge, Commitment, Progress, Toyota Motor North America, Washington, DC. UNCTAD (1993), Environmental Management in Transnational Corporations: Report on the Benchmark Corporate Environmental Survey, United Nations, New York, NY. United States EPA (2000), The lean and green supply chain: a practical guide for materials managers and supply chain managers to reduce costs and improve environmental performance, EPA 742-R-00-001, EPA, Ofce of Pollution Prevention and Toxics, Washington, DC. Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (2006a), Extending green practices across the supply chain, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 26, pp. 795-821. Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (2006b), Green project partnership in the supply chain: the case of the package printing industry, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 14 Nos 6/7, pp. 661-71. Vachon, S. and Klassen, R.D. (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. van Hoek, R. (1997), Postponed manufacturing: a case study in the food supply chain, Supply Chain Management: An International Journal, Vol. 2 No. 2, pp. 63-75. van Hoek, R.I., Vos, B. and Commandeur, H.R. (1999), Restructuring European supply chains by implementing postponement strategies, Long Range Planning, Vol. 32 No. 5, pp. 505-18. Veleva, V., Hart, M., Greiner, T. and Crumbley, C. (2003), Indicators for measuring environmental sustainability: a case study of the pharmaceutical industry, Benchmarking: An International Journal, Vol. 10, pp. 107-19. Walker, H., di Sisto, L. and Mcbain, D. (2008), Drivers and barriers to environmental supply chain management practices: lessons from the public and private sectors, Journal of Purchasing & Supply Management, Vol. 14, pp. 69-85.
Walton, S.V., Handeld, R.B. and Melnyk, S.A. (1998), The green supply chain: integrating suppliers into environmental management processes, International Journal of Purchasing & Materials Management, Vol. 34 No. 2, pp. 2-11. Wasserman, S. and Faust, K. (1994), Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Williams, H., Medhurst, J. and Drew, K. (1993), Corporate strategies for a sustainable future, Environmental Strategies for Industry, Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 117-46. Wolters, T., James, P. and Bouman, M. (1997), Stepping-stones for integrated chain management in the rm, Business Strategy and the Environment, Vol. 6 No. 3, pp. 121-32. Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (1996), Lean Thinking: Banish Waste and Create Wealth in Your Corporation, Simon & Schuster, New York, NY. Womack, J.P. and Jones, D.T. (2005), Lean Solutions: How Companies and Customers Can Create Value and Wealth Together, The Free Press, New York, NY. Womack, J.P., Roos, D. and Jones, D. (1990), The Machine that Changed the World, Macmillan, New York, NY. 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. Yang, B. and Burns, N. (2003), Implications of postponement for the supply chain, International Journal of Production Research, Vol. 41 No. 9, pp. 2075-90. Zeng, K. and Eastin, J. (2007), International economic integration and environmental protection: the case of China, International Studies Quarterly, Vol. 51 No. 4, pp. 971-95. Zhu, Q. and Cote, R.P. (2004), Integrating green supply chain management into an embryonic eco-industrial development: a case study of the Guitang Group, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 12 Nos 8/10, pp. 1025-35. Zhu, Q. and 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, Vol. 22 No. 3, pp. 265-89. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Geng, Y. (2005), Green supply chain management in China: pressures, practices and performance, International Journal of Operations & Production Management, Vol. 25 No. 5, pp. 449-68. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J. and Lai, K.-H. (2007), Green supply chain management: pressures, practices and performance within the Chinese automobile industry, Journal of Cleaner Production, Vol. 15 Nos 11/12, pp. 1041-52. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Cordeiro, J.J. and Lai, K.-H. (2008), Firm-level correlates of emergent green supply chain management practices in the Chinese context, Omega, Vol. 36 No. 4, pp. 577-91. Corresponding author Wendy L. Tate can be contacted at: [email protected]
To purchase reprints of this article please e-mail: [email protected] Or visit our web site for further details: www.emeraldinsight.com/reprints
Reproduced with permission of the copyright owner. Further reproduction prohibited without permission.

Green Lean and Global Supply Chains

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Green Lean and Global Supply Chains

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Green Lean and Global Supply Chains

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available at www.emeraldinsight.com/0960-0035.

Green, lean, and global supply chains

Green, lean, and global supply chains 15

Global supply chain

Environmentally sustainable supply chains

Figure 1. Green, lean, and global supply chains: research domain

Table I. Keywords searched

Lean supply chain processes

Green, lean, and global supply chains 17

Table II. Journals searched in Phase 2 of literature search

Green, lean, and global supply chains 19

Drivers Common global environmental standards

Green, lean, and global supply chains 21

Drivers Cost reductions

Commodity risk management

Government regulations and standards

Customer and stakeholder pressure

Lack of expected prots

Green, lean, and global supply chains 23

Green, lean, and global supply chains 25

Drivers Customer demand

Increased transparency and defragmentation of global market

Development of information technology

Six Sigma implementation

Barriers Lead time incompatibility

Green, lean, and global supply chains 27

Green, lean, and global supply chains 29

Green, lean, and global supply chains 31

Green, lean, and global supply chains 33

Green, lean, and global supply chains 35

Green, lean, and global supply chains 37

Green, lean, and global supply chains 39

Green, lean, and global supply chains 41

You might also like