SSCM Variable

Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 1344e1362
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Journal of Cleaner Production

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/jclepro
Development and validation of a scale for measuring Sustainable

Supply Chain Management practices and performance
Muzzammil Wasim Syed
School of Economics and Management, Taiyuan University of Technology
a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t
Article history: The present study is an attempt to conceptualize, develop and validate a scale for the purpose of
Received 6 June 2016 measuring Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM) practices adopted by an organization and also
Received in revised form evaluating its performance on different dimensions of SSCM. Based on extensive review of literature, the
28 June 2017
study has identified five constructs of SSCM practices, namely Environmental Management Practices,
Accepted 1 July 2017
Operations practices, Supply Chain Integration, Socially Inclusive Practices for Employees, and Socially In-
Available online 3 July 2017
clusive Practices for Community and another five constructs of SSCM performance namely Environmental
Performance, Operations Performance, Competitiveness, Employee-centred Social Performance, and
Keywords:
Sustainable supply chain management
Community-centred Social Performance. A survey instrument was designed based on the extant literature
Environmental management practices and relevant data was collected on this instrument from 255 organizations. The data analysis primarily
Socially inclusive practices involves application of confirmatory factor analysis for validating the instrument in respect of unidi-
Operations practices mensionality, reliability, convergent validity, discriminant validity, nomological validity and criterion-
Competitiveness related validity. The outcome of the analysis gives rise to a parsimonious instrument which makes a
significant contribution to SCM literature. The instrument would enable an organization to implement
different elements of SSCM practices, monitor the status of its implementation and finally assess orga-
nizational performance on the dimensions of SSCM.
© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
1. Introduction mitigate negative environmental impact on the surrounding area, it

also results in significant positive impact on firm economic per-
Traditionally, most of the Operations and Supply Chain man- formance (Golicic and Smith, 2013). Similarly, implementation of
agers are simply concerned with the economic goals of an organi- corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices by a firm does not
zation and do not feel motivated enough to pay much needed confine itself to only addressing the needs of the employees and the
attention to the environmental and social issues faced by an orga- local community, it mostly gives rise to significant positive impact
nization. However, contemporary developments in business envi- on firm financial performance (Zhu et al., 2016). Sustainable Supply
ronment since the last decade indicate that merely pursuing Chain Management (SSCM) blends the goals of both CSR and GSCM,
economic motive is not a sound decision alternative for an orga- which in turn, helps organizations achieve its economic goals,
nization from long-term sustainability and profitability point of environmental goals, and societal goals at a micro level and ulti-
view, if the actions of the organization cause irreversible damages mately improve the image of the firms in the eyes of the
to the eco-system and fail to secure safety, security, minimum stakeholders.
wage, healthcare, better working conditions for employees, Literature is replete with a number of studies on environmental
improved living condition for the surrounding community, and the and GSCM (Zhu and Sarkis, 2004, 2007; Zhu et al., 2007, 2008a;
society at large. This phenomenon has motivated both researchers 2008b, 2008c; 2012; Darnall et al., 2008; Rao et al., 2009;
and practitioners towards Green and Sustainable Supply Chain Giovanni, 2012; Green Jr. et al., 2012; Mitra and Datta, 2014) in
Management (SSCM). Adoption of environmental or green supply terms of the development of specific constructs of GSCM practices
chain management (GSCM) practices by a firm does not merely and how the same influence economic and environmental perfor-
mance of an organization. GSCM primarily captures two di-
mensions of a supply chain: economic and environmental.
However, the above studies have not attempted to identify and
E-mail addresses: [email protected], [email protected].
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.07.006
0959-6526/© 2017 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
D. Das / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 1344e1362 1345
address the needs of the people across the supply chain which is an the environment. However, operations or the economic facets have
integral component of sustainable development, as mentioned in not been captured in this scale. Moreover, this scale has not
the Brundtland report (WCED, 1987). Since last decade, academic considered the measures of performance for evaluating social or
community in operations domain has also started paying attention economic performance. The scale developed by Mani et al. (2016a,
to social dimension along with the economic and environmental 2016b) include the development of only social construct in a supply
ones simultaneously (Kleindorfer et al., 2005; Linton et al., 2007; chain encompassing suppliers, manufacturers, and customers with
Carter and Rogers, 2008; Seuring and Müller, 2008; Vachon and reference to supply chain sustainability and cover neither economic
Mao, 2008; Pagell and Wu, 2009; Carter and Easton, 2011; Winter dimension, nor environmental dimension. CSR scale developed by
and Knemeyer, 2013). Kleindorfer et al. (2005) argued that sus- Zhu et al. (2016) includes majorly the practices relating to the
tainable operations management must help companies become employees and the community and certain practices relevant to the
agile, adaptive, and aligned in balancing the needs of three Ps, environment. It does not capture operations or economic practices.
people, planet, and profit. Linton et al. (2007) attempted to link The study has also tried to investigate the impact of the practices on
sustainability and supply chains by considering both environ- social performance and financial performance. However, neither
mental and societal aspects. Their study merely provides an over- operations performance nor environmental performance has been
view of sustainable supply chain and has not covered the explored. Marshall et al. (2014) developed a scale comprising sus-
development of scales or constructs of SSCM. Carter and Rogers tainable environmental practices and sustainable social practices.
(2008) suggested a theoretical framework of SSCM based on However, the economic dimension was not included in their scale.
resource dependence theory, population ecology, transaction cost Moreover, they did not attempt to identify relevant measures of
economics, and resource-based view of the firm. Seuring and performance for evaluating environmental or social sustainability
Müller (2008) developed a conceptual framework of SSCM based performance. Esfahbodi et al. (2016) confined their study to the
on extensive review of literature. However, these findings lack the trade-offs between environmental and cost performance and have
development of specific constructs of SSCM. Pagell and Wu (2009) not incorporated social performance in the same. Thus there exists
attempted to provide a conceptual model of SSCM using case a considerable gap in literature in respect of the availability of a
studies of 10 exemplar firms. Gupta and Palsule-Desai (2011) pro- proper scale which includes all three dimensions of sustainability
vided an overview of conceptual foundation of SSCM. Carter and in terms of both SSCM practices and SSCM performance. The pre-
Easton (2011) highlighted the evolution and future research di- sent study seeks to fill this gap.
rections of SSCM through a systematic review of literature. Winter Another motivation of choosing this particular research problem
and Knemeyer (2013) pinpointed the lack of integrated approach is the growing emphasis of several journals on this current theme.
between the dimensions of sustainability and the elements of SCM. Examples include the special issue of the Journal of Cleaner Pro-
Beske and Seuring (2014) identified SSCM practices based on duction titled ‘Sustainability and Supply Chain Management’
existing literature and grouped them under five categories. How- (Huisingh, 2008), special topic forum of Journal of Supply Chain
ever, this is merely a conceptual paper and no attempt has been Management on Sustainable Supply Chain Management (Krause
made to apply the framework in a real-life setting. et al., 2009), special issue of International Journal of Operations &
There are very few empirical studies on SSCM, which have Production Management titled ‘Sustainable Operations Manage-
attempted to capture all relevant constructs of SSCM. Pullman et al. ment: Recent trends and future directions’ (Walker et al., 2014), and
(2009) revealed that environmental and social sustainability more recently another special topic forum of Journal of Supply Chain
practices have positive and indirect impact on firm performance. Management devoted towards theory building surrounding SSCM
However, their findings do not encompass all relevant elements of (Markman and Krause, 2016). All these special editions emphasize
SSCM. Wu and Pagell (2011) demonstrated how the organizations upon the fact that SSCM is a contemporary problem confronting
attempt to balance the achievement of profitability goal, environ- both the academic community and the practitioners. However, we
mental goal, and social goal under conditions of uncertainty by hardly came across a paper which is devoted towards the devel-
adopting a case study approach. The set of propositions recom- opment of SSCM scale. This, of course, involves borrowing relevant
mended by them have not been empirically tested. Gold et al. items from a somewhat fuzzy domain of sustainability and an
(2013) explained how multinational corporations (MNCs) utilize evolving field of SCM. Both the concepts of Sustainable Develop-
the concepts of SSCM to integrate ‘Base of the Pyramid’ (BoP) in ment (SD) and SCM, in isolation, are quite rich in terms of extant
creating sustainable value by involving the local community with literature, with SD being applied to the broad macro-environment
the help of a case study research carried out in several firms while SCM is relevant to the micro-environment. The interface
engaged in food sector. However, the findings of this study might between SD and SCM is an emerging area of research. The challenge
not be applicable to other industries and might also be difficult to lies in how to make the broad concepts of sustainability relevant,
generalize in the food industry as a whole. applicable and operationalizable to SCM at firm level.
As regards the availability of previously established scales, With this background, the present study attempts to develop
extant literature reveals the existence of several scales pertaining to and empirically validate a scale combining both SSCM practices and
SCM (Chen and Paulraj, 2004a; Li et al., 2005), environmental/ SSCM performance measures. This study contributes to the existing
GSCM (Zhu et al., 2008a; Rao et al., 2009), social sustainability in body of SCM literature by way of developing a parsimonious scale
supply chain (Lu et al., 2012; Mani et al., 2016a, 2016b; Zhu et al., incorporating the relevant elements of SSCM. This would enable
2016) etc. The SCM scale developed by Chen and Paulraj (2004a) the decision-maker in measuring the practices of SSCM encom-
and Li et al. (2005) includes only economic dimension across the passing economic, environmental, and social dimensions and at the
whole supply chain and does not incorporate environmental same time would allow him to evaluate SSCM performance on the
dimension, nor social dimension. As mentioned in the beginning, above three dimensions. In the present study, operations perfor-
environmental/GSCM scale (Zhu et al., 2008a; Rao et al., 2009) mance has been used as a proxy to measure economic performance.
represents environmental and economic aspects of the supply The remainder of the paper is as follows. Section 2 provides an
chain but does not account for social dimension of the supply chain. overview about the theoretical foundation on Sustainability and
Socially responsible scale developed by Lu et al. (2012) in the SCM. Section 3 discusses the building blocks of SSCM covering both
context of supplier development includes the practices pertaining SSCM practices and SSCM performance. Section 4 covers research
to the employees, customers, suppliers, community, investors, and method in detail. Section 5, considered the heart of the paper,
1346 D. Das / Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 1344e1362
presents data analysis and interpretation of the same. Section 6 firm operates. This concept, somewhat analogous to the TBL
presents discussion, theoretical contribution of the work and its concept, also attaches equal importance to all three aspects of
managerial implications. The paper concludes with a comparison of sustainability. However, the economic outcomes are always prior-
SSCM practices between Indian and Chinese companies, scope for itized first before social or environmental issues are addressed in
widening the boundary of the scale, its limitations, and future both academic research and practice in almost all the above three
research directions. approaches (Markman and Krause, 2016).
Another model termed as ‘Nested sustainable development’ was
2. Theoretical foundation of SSCM suggested by Giddings et al. (2002), in which the economy is shown
to be nested within society, which in turn, is nested within the
The present study draws on the literature of both Sustainable environment. Similar kind of model was also proposed by
Development (SD) and SCM. SD is concerned with meeting the Montabon et al. (2016) with specific reference to SSCM. This is
needs of present without compromising the ability of future gen- named as ‘Ecologically dominant logic’. Montabon et al. (2016)
erations to meet their needs (WCED, 1987). It covers the broad argued that the economic system is subservient to the social sys-
macro dimensions of economy, environment, and society. SCM is a tem, which, in turn, is subservient to the ecological system. This
set of approaches utilized to efficiently integrate suppliers, manu- implies that the ecological environment serves as a broad frame-
facturers, warehouses, and stores so that merchandise is produced work or constraint within which the social system should operate
and distributed at the right quantities, to the right locations, and at and social environment acts as the second constraint within which
the right time in order to minimize system-wide costs while the economic system should function. In other words, this means
satisfying service level requirements (Simchi-Levi et al., 2008). The that the ecological constraint and social goals must be fulfilled first
focus of SCM is on improving the operational efficiency. The chal- before economic goals are satisfied. This sounds highly ambitious
lenge lies in integrating the philosophy and principles of SD into the and somewhat difficult to operationalize for an individual firm.
whole supply chain. However, before integrating the concept of SD However, Montabon et al. (2016) provided a framework of
into SCM, it is necessary to delve into the crux of these two different ecologically dominant logic, which would enable a firm to move
concepts. towards realizing the goal of true sustainability. This ecologically
dominant logic and the associated framework would trigger aca-
2.1. Sustainability demic research which, in turn, is expected to motivate the firms to
put in efforts towards the direction of achieving true sustainability.
Sustainable Development (SD) is a contested concept with In this context, it is relevant to mention the contribution of
divergent views and perspectives (Giddings et al., 2002). It pri- Haughton (1999) who advocated five principles of equity from the
marily conveys the concept as the intersection of economy, envi- perspective of SD. These five principles are: (i) equity (inter-
ronment, and the society. Although the term sustainability was generational equity), (ii) social-justice (intra-generational equity),
coined in early 1980s, global community started paying attention to (iii) transfrontier responsibility (geographical equity), (iv) proce-
the concept only after the publication of the classic definition of SD dural equity (people treated fairly), and (v) inter-species equity
provided by the Brundtland report (WCED, 1987). Researchers in (importance of biodiversity). These principles essentially convey
the domain of SD have presented the three dimensions of sus- the spirit of SD. A sustainable supply chain should contain most of
tainability as being composed of three interconnected rings, also these elements of equity and justice.
known as ‘Common three-ring sector view of sustainable devel-
opment’ (Barton, 2000; Giddings et al., 2002). Although this model 2.2. Supply chain management
is conceptually simple, it suffers from several weaknesses. The
focus of this model is on the intersection of the economy, envi- The concept of SCM started receiving increasing attention from
ronment, and the society. However, in reality, economy dominates researchers and practitioners since late 1990s in response to the
both the environment and the society. Further sectoral view of this competitive pressure in terms of improved quality, reduced cost,
model encourages a technical fix approach to SD issues and does increased responsiveness, and shorter lead time. The genesis of
not involve proper investigation of the relationship between SCM seems to be an evolutionary phenomenon with the develop-
economy, environment, and the society. As such the environmental ment of total quality management (TQM), just in time (JIT), and lean
and social issues often fall off the SD agenda (Giddings et al., 2002). production in Japanese manufacturing plants. Few authors (Corbett
The concept of ‘triple bottom line’ (TBL) introduced by Elkington and Klassen, 2006; Mitra and Datta, 2014) also argued that the
(2004) received worldwide recognition and became a reference practices of TQM, JIT, and lean operations have culminated into
point for research in the domain of sustainability. Both the concepts GSCM. The main aims of TQM are to design quality into the prod-
of TBL and sectoral view of the model served as triggers for the ucts and services by institutionalizing a corporate wide culture
development of SSCM framework (Carter and Rogers, 2008; Carter emphasizing customer focus, continuous improvement, employee
and Easton, 2011; Winter and Knemeyer, 2013). TBL attempts to empowerment, and data driven decision making (Kannan and Tan,
treat all three dimensions of sustainability with equal importance 2005). The literature on TQM is quite vast. For instance, Flynn et al.
and thus could be considered an integrative theory of sustainability. (1994) introduced seven dimensions of quality management while
Similarly natural resource based view of the firm introduced by Ahire et al. (1996) developed 12 constructs of TQM. In both the
Hart (1995), another form of sustainability, is also considered works, most of the quality management practices construct was
integrative in nature, although it has not explicitly addressed the found to be identical in nature. For instance, top management
needs of all stakeholders of the society. Porter (1991) introduced commitment, customer focus, usage of process control, product
‘win-win’ perspective with reference to the conflict between design quality, employee involvement, supplier involvement etc.
environment and the economy. He argued that the firms can be are present in both the findings. Kaynak (2003) made use of similar
environmentally-friendly and at the same time can make profit. type of TQM constructs while investigating the impact of TQM
Porter and Kramer (2011) introduced another concept titled practices on firm performance. Further Kim et al. (2012) utilized
‘creating shared value’. They explained that this policy can enable a almost same type of constructs while exploring the relationship
firm to enhance its competitiveness and at the same time advance between quality management practices and innovation.
the economic and social conditions of the community in which the “Just-in-Time” means making “only what is needed, when it is
needed, and in the amount needed.” (www.toyota-global.com/......... researchers turned out to be different. Careful observation of the
/just-in-time.html). Mehra and Inman (1992) introduced 20 ele- items and constructs of SCM practices of the above findings reveal
ments of JIT implementation practices which were grouped under that most of them have considered customer relations/customer
four factors: (i) management commitment, (ii) JIT production focus, quality management, JIT and lean operations to be part of
strategy, (iii) JIT vendor strategy, and (iv) JIT education strategy. SCM practices. All these practices essentially lead to the improve-
White et al. (1999) identified 10 JIT practices in which ‘total quality ment of operational efficiency across the whole supply chain.
control’ constitutes one of the important practices. The concept of
lean production is considered an extension of JIT and sometimes 3. Building blocks of SSCM
both of them are used interchangeably. The distinguishing feature
of lean production from JIT is its focus on elimination of waste by Initial research in the domain of SSCM mostly dealt with envi-
simplifying production processes (Womack et al., 1991). It is also ronmental management/GSCM practices adopted by a firm and its
viewed from the perspective of customer value. The philosophy of impact on firm performance while the later research also includes
lean production suggests that every step in the production process social dimension into the GSCM practices and investigates different
must add some value that the customer actually wants and for dimensions of SSCM practices on firm performance. Since the aim
which the customer is willing to pay (Chase et al., 2014). The suc- of the present study is to design an appropriate scale for SSCM
cess of both JIT and lean manufacturing depends on coordination of practices and SSCM performance, this section is discussed broadly
production schedule with supplier deliveries, and high level of under two heads: SSCM practices and SSCM performance.
service from suppliers both in terms of quality and reliability. This
involves the development of close relation with the suppliers and 3.1. SSCM practices
integration of production plan with the suppliers. Further right
quality of materials is required to be delivered by the suppliers for The motivation to include all three dimensions of sustainability
ensuring uninterrupted operation. Thus quality is considered an into SSCM practices has emanated from the concept of TBL intro-
essential pre-requisite for successful implementation of JIT and lean duced by Elkington (2004), the principles of equity in SD as pro-
manufacturing. Snell and Dean (1992) observed that it is quite pounded by Haughton (1999), the ecologically dominant logic as
difficult to distinguish between TQM and JIT, since both of them suggested by Montabon et al. (2016), and finally the concept of
have many common elements. Further Yang et al. (2011) showed SCM. Thus in tune with the principles of sustainability and the
that the construct of lean manufacturing consists of JIT, TQM, and concept of SCM, SSCM practices considered in the present study
employee involvement. There exist divergent views in literature have been grouped under four building blocks: environmental
although there are some commonalities. The specific focus of TQM management practices, socially inclusive practices, operations
seems to be on quality while JIT emphasizes on quality, cost and practices, and supply chain integration. These four building blocks
delivery time. Lean production adds one more dimension, namely are intended to capture the whole essence of SSCM practices. A
the evaluation of each activity as value-adding or non-value-adding conscious attempt was made to choose the items of SSCM practices
from the customer’s perspective. cited in academic literature in such a manner which would allow
A close look at the elements JIT and lean production reveals that them to necessarily fall in one of the four building blocks of SSCM
all these are explicitly or implicitly present in SCM as well. The practices. Further the justification to categorize them under four
concept of SCM encompasses the operations of an organization building blocks is to have clearly distinguishable and oper-
both upstream and downstream including its internal operation. ationalizable practices and finally develop an empirically validated
Council of Supply Chain Management Professionals (CSCMP) has scale of SSCM practices.
defined SCM as the planning and management of all activities
involved in sourcing, procurement, conversion, and all logistics 3.1.1. Environmental management practices
management activities. Importantly, it also includes coordination The rationale behind considering environmental management
and collaboration with channel partners, which can be suppliers, practices (EMP) as one of the important factors influencing the
intermediaries, third-party service providers, and customers performance of an organization and its competitiveness can be
(https://cscmp.org......). SCM literature is quite rich in terms of the traced back to the findings of Porter and Linde (1995), Hart (1995),
development of SCM practices construct. Tan et al. (1999) broadly Shrivastava (1995), Klassen and McLaughlin (1996), and Klassen
identified three components of SCM practices: (i) TQM practices, and Whybark (1999). The broad findings of the above works
(ii) supply base management practices, and (iii) customer relations reveal that environmental elements have an important bearing on
practices for proper implementation of SCM practices. In another overall performance and competitiveness of an organization. The
study, Tan et al. (2002) developed six constructs of SCM practices, above findings have encouraged a number of researchers across the
namely (i) supply chain integration, (ii) information sharing, (iii) globe to carry out in-depth studies in the domain of environmental
supply chain characteristics, (iv) customer service management, (v) and GSCM and identify relevant items which would capture the
geographical proximity, and (vi) JIT capability while investigating practices relevant to environmental or green construct. While
its different facets. Chen and Paulraj (2004a) introduced five con- evaluating the impact of environmental proactivity on business
structs of SCM driving forces and seven constructs of SCM practices performance, Gonz alez-Benito and Gonza lez-Benito (2005) iden-
for successful implementation of SCM. The findings of this study tified several items: substitution of hazardous materials, designs
reveal that customer focus and quality maintained through sup- focused on reducing the consumption of energy, resource and
plier relationship constitute important elements of SCM imple- generation of waste, recyclable or reusable packaging in logistics
mentation. Further Li et al. (2005) introduced six constructs of SCM etc. A number of items relating to green practices across the whole
practices. The findings of this work indicate that partnership with supply chain were identified by Zhu and Sarkis (2004, 2007) and
suppliers for improvement of quality, customer relationship, and Zhu et al. (2007; 2008a; 2008b; 2008c). Some of these items are:
lean practices are important constructs of SCM practices. existence of IS0 14001 certification or comparable environmental
Thus there are divergent findings in terms of the development of management systems; providing design specification to suppliers
constructs of SCM practices. However, there exists resemblance for supplied items that include environmental compliance; sup-
across these constructs at least in terms of some observable items, pliers’ ISO 14001 certification; co-operation with customers for
although the nomenclature of the constructs given by different eco-design, cleaner production, and green packaging; design of
products for reduced consumption of materials and energy; design manufacturing practices lead to improved market performance and
of products to avoid or reduce the use of hazardous materials; improved financial performance. Yang et al. (2010) indicated that
design of products for reuse, recycle and recovery of materials; the implementation of supply chain practices and continuous
utilization of renewable sources of energy etc. Most of the above improvement like JIT and TQM leads to the manufacturing
items of EMP have also been reflected in the findings of Rao and competitiveness of a firm in terms of its cost, quality and delivery.
Holt (2005), Rao et al. (2009), Diabat and Govindan (2011), Green Specific items relating to quality management considered in the
Jr. et al. (2012), Zailani et al. (2012), Laosirihongthong et al. earlier works include implementation of quality management
(2013), Marshall et al. (2014) and Mitra and Datta (2014). Further system (QMS) to build quality into the product, selection of sup-
Beske and Seuring (2014) and Beske et al. (2014) suggested the pliers based on quality rather than cost, facilitating suppliers
adoption of environmental standards and certification (e.g. ISO implement TQM/Six sigma etc. (Flynn et al., 1994; Ahire et al., 1996;
14001) by the focal company and its suppliers for minimizing risk Kaynak, 2003; Chen and Paulraj, 2004a, 2004b; Kannan and Tan,
due to adverse environmental impact. They also recommended the 2005; Kim et al., 2012). Some researchers (Ibusuki and Kaminski,
inclusion of pro-activity through life-cycle assessment which 2007; Behncke et al., 2014) recommended the focal company to
essentially implies reuse and recycle of products. Based on the help suppliers implement value engineering for reducing the cost
above discussion, most of the items have been adapted and of components. Several other researchers (Tan et al., 2002; Kannan
included in the present study. and Tan, 2005; Yang et al., 2011) suggested the adoption of scientific
inventory control technique and implementation of JIT in the
3.1.2. Socially inclusive practices supply chain for improving efficiency and reducing inventory.
An organization cannot afford to remain impervious to the is- Further for minimizing waste, lean production system was pro-
sues affecting the economic condition, working condition, health, posed (Kleindorfer et al., 2005; Li et al., 2005; Simpson and Power,
safety, equity, and education of its employees and the surrounding 2005; Mefford, 2011; Yang et al., 2011). For improving efficiency in
community. However, the research findings linking socially inclu- transportation, Wu et al. (2015) and Sheu and Chen (2014) advo-
sive practices adopted by a firm with its performance are limited. cated the application of economies of scale in transportation. Based
The early finding can be traced back to the seminal work of McGuire on the above discussion, most of the above items have been
et al. (1988) in which it is revealed that the firms performing low in included in the present study with suitable modification.
CSR would experience lower return on assets. Mackay et al. (2007)
demonstrated that the firms engaging themselves in socially 3.1.4. Supply chain integration
responsible activities tend to maximize their market value. Welford Supply chain, being inherently complex, includes numerous
and Frost (2006) revealed that CSR leads to direct cost reduction activities spread over multiple functions within an organization
which is achieved through reduction in energy usage, water con- and also across different organizations both upstream and down-
sumption, waste reduction, and efficient use of raw materials. stream. The challenge in SCM is met not merely by coordinating
However, the study argues that CSR would remain confined to a production, transportation and inventory decisions but, more
small number of large companies. Saeidi et al. (2015) argued that generally, by integrating the front end of the supply chain,
the positive effect of CSR on firm performance is due to the positive customer demand, to its back end, production portion of the supply
effect CSR has on competitive advantage, reputation, and customer chain (Simchi-Levi et al., 2008). Supply Chain Integration (SCI)
satisfaction. Socially inclusive practices could be classified under implies the integration of both upstream suppliers and down-
two heads: Socially inclusive practices for employees (SPE) and stream customers and also the integration of various internal
socially inclusive practices for community (SPC). SPE includes functions (Vickery et al., 2003). Several researchers (Pagell, 2004;
provision for fair wages and perquisites; safe, healthy, and positive Power, 2005) defined SCI as an approach for the forward and
working environment; health care benefits; leave and other fringe backward integration of information among suppliers, manufac-
benefits; and opportunities for growth (Welford and Frost, 2006; turers, distributors, and customers. Further Cagliano et al. (2006)
Hutchins and Sutherland, 2008; Lu et al., 2012; Marshall et al., argued that SCI is a coordination mechanism that simplifies inter-
2014; Mani et al., 2016a, 2016b; Zhu et al., 2016). In addition, pro- nal and external business processes. Lii and Kuo (2016) divided SCI
hibition of child labour and protection of labour rights (Mani et al., under three heads: customer integration, supplier integration, and
2016a, 2016b; Zhu et al., 2016) have also been considered under internal integration. Some of the items of SCI suggested by them
SPE. SPC refers to the investments made by a firm in creating op- include sharing of information on customer demand by the
portunities for the surrounding community in terms of generation downstream partners, sharing of customer demand with the sup-
of employment and business and also in providing education, pliers, sharing of production plan with the suppliers, sharing of
training, and healthcare facilities with a view to making the firm inventory with suppliers, integration and connection among all
progressive in the eyes of the stakeholders (Hutchins and internal functions etc. Further most of the items relating to SCI were
Sutherland, 2008; Lu et al., 2012; Mani et al., 2016a, 2016b; Zhu also identified by Tan et al. (2002) and Kannan and Tan (2005).
et al., 2016). Review of the above findings has enabled us to iden- Some of these items are: establishing frequent contact with supply
tify the items relevant to SPC and SPE and include the same in the chain members, estimation of customers’ future needs, communi-
present study with suitable adaptation. cating customers’ needs to the suppliers, improving integration
activities across SC, responding to the needs of customers by
3.1.3. Operations practices keeping adequate inventory etc. Based on the aforementioned
Operations practices (OP) involve introduction of operations discussion, most of the above items have been suitably adapted and
management techniques for enhancing efficiency, improving utilized in the present study.
quality, reducing inventory, and minimizing waste across the entire
value chain. Some of the well-known OP includes TQM, six sigma, 3.2. SSCM performance
value engineering, JIT, lean production, inventory management etc.
Kaynak (2003) demonstrated the positive effects of TQM practices There are primarily three dimensions of SSCM performance for
on firm performance. However, he argued, the support of the top capturing the spirit of sustainability in organizational performance:
management is a necessary pre-requisite for successful imple- economic performance, environmental performance and social
mentation of TQM. Yang et al. (2011) proved that lean performance. In addition, researchers included few other
dimensions as well. For example, operations performance was 3.2.3. Operations performance
considered in the works of Zhu et al. (2007; 2008a; 2012), Green Jr. Operations performance (OPR) implies the extent of improve-
et al. (2012), and Zailani et al. (2012). Competitiveness dimension ment in organizational performance in terms of decrease in cost
was added by Tracey et al. (1999), Rao and Holt (2005), Li et al. and improvement of efficiency across the whole supply chain. The
(2006), Rao et al. (2009) and Yang et al. (2010). It is found that findings of Gonza lez-Benito and Gonz alez-Benito (2005) reveal
several items considered by different researchers under economic significant positive association between advanced operations
performance, operations performance and competitiveness overlap management systems and mass operational and lean operational
with each other. Further the connotation of the term ‘economic performance. Decrease in cost of purchased materials/cost of pro-
performance’ is somewhat macro in nature and therefore, in the duction was suggested by Chen and Paulraj (2004a, 2004b), Zhu
present study, we have utilized the term ‘operations performance’ et al. (2007, 2008a), Pullman et al. (2009), Green Jr. et al. (2012),
in lieu of ‘economic performance’ within the framework of orga- Wittstruck and Teuteberg (2012), Zailani et al. (2012), Harms
nizational performance. Following the principles of sustainability, et al. (2013), Laosirihongthong et al. (2013), and Esfahbodi et al.
SSCM performance in the present study has been considered under (2016). Decrease in the energy consumption/cost of energy con-
four dimensions: environmental performance, social performance, sumption was recommended by Zhu et al. (2007, 2008a), Green Jr.
operations performance, and competitiveness. The items of SSCM et al. (2012), Wittstruck and Teuteberg (2012), Zailani et al. (2012),
performance cited in the extant literature have been selected in and Esfahbodi et al. (2016). Further improvement of logistics effi-
such a manner which would allow them to come under one of the ciency was utilized by Zhou et al. (2008) and Park and Lee (2015).
four SSCM performance dimensions. This has helped us in oper- Most of the items discussed above have been suitably adapted and
ationalization of the items and finally empirical validation of the included in the present study.
same.
3.2.4. Competitiveness
3.2.1. Environmental performance Competitiveness of a firm indicates those capabilities that dif-
Organizations adopting EMP or GSCM practices are likely to ferentiates itself from its competitors and is an outcome of a critical
engage themselves in evaluating their environmental performance management decision (Tracey et al., 1999; Li et al., 2006). Elements
(EPR). There are several performance metrics through which EPR is of competitiveness suggested in literature include price/cost
measured. It is reflected through reduction in the discharge of solid (Tracey et al., 1999; Li et al., 2006; Yang et al., 2010), quality (Tracey
waste, liquid waste, gaseous waste, toxic materials; reduction in the et al., 1999; Rao and Holt, 2005; Li et al., 2006; Yang et al., 2010;
cost of effluent treatment and discharge; reduction in the fre- Mitra and Datta, 2014), delivery dependability/fill rate (Tracey
quency of environmental accident (Zhu and Sarkis, 2004, 2007; Zhu et al., 1999; Li et al., 2006; Yang et al., 2010) and improvement in
et al., 2007, 2008a; Rao et al., 2009; Harms et al., 2013; Esfahbodi productivity/capacity utilization (Rao and Holt, 2005; Mitra and
et al., 2016) and so on. Welford and Frost (2006) suggested Datta, 2014). The element of cost performance has also been
another item: reduction in the occurrences of accident in the shop- treated under Operations Performance in some findings as revealed
floor. In addition, protection of bio-diversity was considered by in Section 3.2.3. In addition, several other items have also been
Pullman et al. (2009) and Harms et al. (2013). Based on the above incorporated in the present study for improving the competitive-
revelation, almost all the above items have been considered in the ness of a firm. These include differentiation in competition/prod-
present study for evaluating environmental performance. ucts (Lόpez-Gamero et al., 2009; Wittstruck and Teuteberg, 2012),
retention of customer base (Wittstruck and Teuteberg, 2012), new
3.2.2. Social performance market opportunities (Rao and Holt, 2005; Rao et al., 2009) and
Impressive performance of a firm on social dimension becomes improvement in corporate image (Gonza lez-Benito and Gonza lez-
a source of competitive advantage as propounded through Benito, 2005; Rao et al., 2009; Wittstruck and Teuteberg, 2012).
Resource based view of the firm (Barney, 1991; Grant, 1991). The traditional dimension of competitiveness only includes those
However, the evaluation of firm performance on social dimension attributes that interface between the firm and the market and do
for both employees and the community requires sufficient amount not consider environmental practices. The seminal work of Porter
of time during which the management needs to monitor as to what and van der Linde, 1995 reveals that a firm can become
extent the investment made in SPE and SPC has actually contrib- immensely competitive by undertaking green initiatives. Similar
uted towards improving the capabilities of employees and creating kind of argument was also articulated by Rao and Holt (2005) who
enabling environment for the surrounding community. The per- mentioned that environmental stewardness has become an
formance of an organization in this domain is normally covered important element in improving the competitiveness of a firm with
under employee-centred social performance (ESP) and the growing awareness of the customers towards environmental
community-centred social performance (CSP). ESP is reflected in issues. Based on the above discussion, most of the items have been
terms of reduction in inequity in employees’ remuneration adapted and included in the present study.
(Welford and Frost, 2006; Boyd et al., 2007; Hutchins and Building blocks of SSCM practices, discussed under four heads
Sutherland, 2008; Zhu and Zhang, 2015; Mani et al., 2016a, namely environmental management practices, socially inclusive
2016b; Zhu et al., 2016), improvement of employees’ health, practices, operations practices, and supply chain integration, reflect
working condition, and living condition (Hutchins and Sutherland, the essence of the practices which are unique to SSCM. They are not
2008; Zhu and Zhang, 2015; Mani et al., 2016a, 2016b; Zhu et al., disparate or mutually exclusive in nature. Rather they are essen-
2016) which enable the employees to develop their capabilities tially complementary in nature and together they represent the
within the organization. CSP is indicated in terms of corporate so- holistic practices adopted by a firm from the point of sustainability.
cial image (Duarte et al., 2014), enhancement of opportunity in Managers working in an SSCM environment are not merely con-
employment/business of the surrounding community, improve- cerned with implementing the practices relating to cost reduction
ment in their level of education, literacy level, and health. (Hutchins or waste reduction. They are sensitized to keep in mind the envi-
and Sutherland, 2008; Zhu and Zhang, 2015; Mani et al., 2016a, ronmental and social impact of operations practices and are,
2016b; Zhu et al., 2016). The above items revealed through the therefore, encouraged to apply socially and environmentally-
review of related works have been suitably adapted and included in friendly operations practices in the organization. Further the
the present study. building blocks of SSCM performance, discussed under four heads,
cannot be considered as combination of several disjointed di- procurement, production and operations, logistics and distribution,
mensions of organizational performance. All four SSCM practices environment, health and safety (EHS), marketing and sales func-
are likely to have an impact on operations performance, environ- tions from different organizations. It was found that 16 respondents
mental performance, and social performance. They, in turn, are out of 30 could not provide responses on three items of SSCM
likely to affect the competitiveness of a firm. This would become practices relating to reverse logistics function. On further investi-
evident once the scale of both SSCM practices and SSCM perfor- gation, it was found that these respondents belong to those in-
mance are empirically validated and subsequently an investigation dustries (power generation, power distribution, petroleum refining
is made with regard to the impact of SSCM practices on different and distribution, engineering goods, steel, aluminium, cement etc.)
dimensions of SSCM performance. Several researchers (Rao and in which reverse logistics functions are not practiced or are not
Holt, 2005; Rao et al., 2009; Mitra and Datta, 2014) have attemp- popular. Accordingly these three questions were dropped from the
ted to investigate the impact of environmental/green practices on list of SSCM practices thereby reducing the total number of vari-
organizational performance and competitiveness. The findings of ables of SSCM practices to 30. Scale reliability of the instrument was
the above works mostly indicate significant positive relationship inspected for the variables of both SSCM practices and SSCM per-
between green practices and business performance and in turn, formance using Cronbach’s coefficient alpha. A scale is said to be
between business performance and competitiveness. The outcome reliable, if Cronbach’s coefficient alpha of the scale is well above the
of the present study would also serve as a basis for investigating the threshold value of 0.700 and the acceptable minimum of 0.600
impact of SSCM practices on different dimensions of SSCM perfor- (Cronbach, 1951; Hair et al., 2009). Cronbach’s coefficient alpha of
mance and finally the competitiveness of a firm. the scale of SSCM practices and SSCM performance measures
turned out to be 0.918 and 0.951 respectively with high corrected
4. Research methodology item-to-total correlations indicating the presence of high internal
consistency in the measurement scale.
The key issue involved in carrying out this research revolves
around the development and validation of a scale for imple- 4.3. Target organizations and target respondents
mentation of SSCM practices in an organization and performance
evaluation on different measures of SSCM. The survey was carried out in manufacturing and process in-
dustries operating in India. The list of the companies in which the
4.1. Design of survey instrument study was planned to be carried out was initially gleaned from ET-
500 list (www.economictimes.indiatimes.com/marketstats/pid-
A list of items pertaining to SSCM practices and another list of 56..........year-2014.cms). This list contains top 500 Indian com-
items relating to performance measures of SSCM, as discussed in panies for the year 2014 across all major sectors. Subsequently a
Section 3, were derived from the extant literature. Appendix A and working paper containing corporate sustainability initiatives of
B presents the list of SSCM practices (33 items) and SSCM perfor- India’s most valuable companies was analyzed (www.iimb.ernet.in/
mance measures (26 items) respectively. These items helped us in research/sites/default/files/WP%20No.%20428_0.pdf). This paper
designing a preliminary questionnaire of SSCM based on the contains sustainability initiatives of India’s top 100 companies
research goal of the present work. The questionnaire was presented across manufacturing, process, infrastructure, realty, and service
to three experts comprising one knowledgeable professional each sector. Only manufacturing and processing firms were shortlisted
from the domain of SCM, environmental management, and CSR from this list of 100 companies. In addition, more number of
with a view to seeking their opinion on the adequate and appro- manufacturing and processing firms was picked up from ET-500
priate coverage of the items concerning SSCM. The professionals list. Home pages of these organizations were visited and their
involved in the activities relating to environmental management mission and vision statement, value system and goals were
and CSR had a holistic view of business operations and therefore, reviewed particularly in terms of their initiatives in the domain of
they were also involved along with the SCM professional for the environmental sustainability, CSR, supplier relationships, and SCM
purpose of enlisting their suggestions into the questionnaire. functions before selecting them in the current study. Further a large
Questionnaire was divided into three sections. The first section of number of suppliers of these companies practicing CSR and envi-
the questionnaire contains questions relating to the demographic ronmental stewardship were also added to the list of survey. Thus
information of the respondents, the type of the industry the or- essentially the sampling process adopted in the current study
ganization belongs to, size of the organization in terms of constitutes judgmental sampling. The target organizations in this
manpower, and turnover. The second section contains questions study include those which are engaged in manufacturing auto-
pertaining to the perception of the respondents on the level of mobiles, auto-components, engineering goods, consumer elec-
adoption of SSCM practices. The third section contains questions tronics and electricals, IT and telecom products, textiles, consumer
relating to the perception of the respondents on different aspects of goods; processing steel and steel products; processing oil, gas and
performance relating to SSCM. A five-point Likert scale was used as petroleum products; generating and distributing power etc.
a response format for both items of SSCM practices and SSCM Within each candidate organization, several senior level pro-
performance with the assigned values ranging from 1 ¼ Not at all fessionals were identified as prospective respondents in order to
True to 5 ¼ Absolutely True (Malhotra and Dash, 2009). The ques- maximize the likelihood of securing at least one response from
tionnaire was presented to the same experts once again. They each organization. These professionals are considered to have suf-
stated that few questions need to be rephrased for ease of under- ficient knowledge and or experience in the activities encompassing
standing. Accordingly the relevant questions were rephrased. The operations and supply chain, environmental sustainability, and
entire exercise ultimately helped us in achieving the content val- CSR. For securing responses from the prospective respondents,
idity of the questionnaire. questionnaire was administered in both offline and online mode. In
case of offline mode, a prior appointment was sought from the
4.2. Reliability of the survey instrument respondents. They were then sent a soft copy of the questionnaire
and a separate background note (shown in Appendix C) on SSCM
In order to find out the reliability of the survey instrument, a through e-mail in order to enable them to have better under-
pilot survey was carried out amongst 30 respondents involved in standing on different facets of SSCM practices and SSCM
performance. In addition, they were verbally briefed about the respondents’ affiliation to organization types, number of respond-
purpose of the study. On the day of the interview, the researcher ing organizations based on manpower and annual turnover. The
carried the hard copy of the questionnaire in person and secured collected data represented the following industries: 53 automobile
responses from the respondents through face-to-face interview. In and automotive (20.8%); 24 engineering goods including heavy
case of online mode, initially the prospective respondents were engineering, metals, and glass (9.4%); 22 steel, aluminum, and
contacted telephonically and requested to provide their valuable cement (8.6%); 19 consumer electronics and electricals (7.5%); 20
inputs. Those giving consent to participate in the survey were sent computer/IT and telecom hardware (7.8%); 27 consumer goods
questionnaire online along with the background note on SSCM. including pharmaceuticals (10.6%); 21 petroleum, oil, and gas
They were also verbally explained the purpose of the study. Once (8.2%); 36 power generation and distribution (14.1%); 16 textiles
the responses in online mode were received, the filled-in ques- and packaging (6.3%) and 17 miscellaneous goods (6.7%). The pro-
tionnaires were checked to see whether meaningful inputs were file of the respondents in terms of their position in the organization
provided by the respondents. In case of any ambiguous response, is as follows: 16 CEO/Director/President/VP (6.3%); 101 GM/DGM/
clarification was sought from the concerned respondents. Low to AGM (39.6%); 138 Senior Manager/Manager (54.1%). Further the
moderate responses were obtained through online questionnaire organizations surveyed were also categorized in terms of the
while most of the responses were obtained through offline mode. number of people and annual turnover as shown in appendix D and
Additionally, some responses were also obtained through e-mail as E. It is found that the maximum number of organizations surveyed
attachment of filled-in questionnaire. In the data analysis, only one in terms of the number of people and annual turnover was in the
response from each organization was considered. Approximately range of 20,000 to <50,000 and Rs. 20,000 Cr. to < Rs. 50,000 Cr.
1200 professionals from the survey list were contacted through respectively.
mails and telephone calls and requested to take part in the study.
5.2. Descriptive statistics
4.4. Tests for potential bias in survey data
The respondents were requested to indicate their responses on
Non-response bias was assessed by performing a t-test on the individual items of SSCM practices and SSCM performance. The
scores of early and late respondents based on the assumption that responses on 30 variables of SSCM practices and 26 variables of
the opinions of late respondents are representative of the opinions SSCM performance are shown in appendix A and B respectively in
of non-respondents (Krause et al., 2001). Respondents were terms of minimum score, maximum score, mean and standard
divided into two groups: 141 responses received towards the deviation. Scale reliability was again inspected using Cronbach’s
beginning of data collection phase and the remaining 114 responses coefficient alpha. In this study, the Cronbach’s coefficient alpha of
received during middle and the end of the data collection period. T- the scale consisting of 30 variables of SSCM practices was 0.942
test was carried out between early respondents with 141 responses with high corrected item-to-total correlations. Further Cronbach’s
and late respondents with 114 responses on all individual items coefficient alpha for the scale consisting of 26 variables of SSCM
which did not reveal any significant differences between the two performance was found to be 0.953.
groups. This indicates that the data was relatively free from non-
response bias. As this study relied on single respondents for do- 5.3. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA)
ing the final analysis, the potential for common method bias to
influence the results needed to be evaluated (Podsakoff et al., Review of related literature carried out in Section 3 (Building
2003). Based on Harman’s one factor test, it is found that unro- blocks of SSCM) has enabled us to uncover the hidden constructs of
tated factor solution does not reveal a single factor which accounts both SSCM practices and SSCM performance. Section 3.1 clearly
for more than 50% of the variance in the data set either in case of reveals that SSCM practices consist of five constructs namely
SSCM practices or SSCM performance measures. Harman’s one- Environmental Management Practices, Socially Inclusive Practices
factor test was further applied into the items of SSCM practices for Employees, Socially Inclusive Practices for Community, Opera-
and those of SSCM performance separately using confirmatory tions Practices, and Supply Chain Integration. The individual items
factor analysis. Test indices of 30 items of SSCM practices by constituting these constructs have been discussed in this section
considering them under one-factor model are: c2 ¼ 1697.344, and shown in appendix A. Further section 3.2 demonstrates that
df ¼ 405, CFI ¼ 0.687, NFI ¼ 0.631, RMSEA ¼ 0.112. Further test SSCM performance comprise another five constructs namely
indices of 26 items of SSCM performance measures by treating Environmental Performance, Employee-centred Social Perfor-
them under one-factor model are: c2 ¼ 2066.605, df ¼ 350, mance, Community-centred Social Performance, Operations Per-
CFI ¼ 0.667, NFI ¼ 0.628, RMSEA ¼ 0.139. The above results indicate formance, and Competitiveness. The items belonging to these
that the common method bias is not a major concern in this study. constructs have been described in this section and shown in
appendix B. This revelation has motivated us to directly apply
5. Data analysis and interpretation confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) instead of initially subjecting the
items of SSCM practices and SSCM performance to exploratory
A total of 276 responses were obtained from all the sources out factor analysis (EFA).
of which 21 questionnaires were improperly or incompletely filled Before carrying out CFA on the items of SSCM practices and
in. Thus the effective number of responses came out to be 255. Once SSCM performance, content validity of the constructs was evaluated.
the data was collected, it was checked for missing values and Content validity indicates whether the instrument contains mea-
inconsistency. The data analyses present an overview of the re- surement items that cover all important aspects of a research
spondents’ demographic profile, descriptive statistics, and finally question (Nunnally, 1978). Its evaluation is primarily a rational
confirmatory factor analysis of SSCM practices and SSCM perfor- judgement process. The content validity of the instrument was
mance measures. achieved while designing the survey instrument. This was carried
out through extensive literature review followed by securing
5.1. Demographic profile opinion from knowledgeable experts through in-depth interviews.
The experts were specifically requested to review the questionnaire
Demographic profile of the responding organizations includes in respect of the content, coverage, clarity, ambiguity and structure.
This resulted in incorporation of minor changes in phrasing of few 5.3.3. Convergent validity
questions for overcoming ambiguity and ensuring ease of under- Convergent validity requires that the indicator variables of a
standing by the respondents. The procedure thus followed resulted given construct share a high proportion of variance in common. It
in content validity of the survey instrument. Subsequently CFA was has been evaluated by following three different approaches. The
carried out for evaluating unidimensionality, reliability, convergent first method involves inspection of estimated factor loadings of
validity, discriminant validity, nomological validity, and finally crite- items on constructs in the final CFA model (Anderson and Gerbing,
rion-related validity of the constructs of SSCM practices and SSCM 1988). It is found that the standardized loadings of all items are
performance. greater than 0.5 and statistically significant (p < 0.001). The values
range from 0.554 to 0.923, which, in other words, indicate that a
very high proportion of variance is captured by each individual
5.3.1. Unidimensionality item. The second method involves assessment of convergent val-
The concept of unidimensionality implies that the items idity of each individual construct with the help of two GOF indices:
considered are measuring a single theoretical construct as opposed Normed fit index (NFI) and Non-normed fit index (NNFI) (Ahire
to more than one construct (Gerbing and Anderson, 1988). The et al., 1996). These fit indices were obtained by specifying and
present study has utilized two different scales for measuring SSCM assessing one-factor congeneric model for each individual
practices and SSCM performance. Unidimensionality of these two construct of SSCM practices and SSCM performance separately.
scales was established by carrying out CFA on the same separately. These fit indices indicate the proportion of improvement of the
This led to the reduction in the number of items of SSCM practices overall fit of the specified measurement model relative to a null
from 30 to 20. The measurement model indicated very good fit to model. Table 1 shows that NFI range from 0.918 to 0.968 and NNFI
almost all goodness of fit (GOF) indices. GOF measures of the from 0.880 to 0.955. These values suggest satisfactory convergent
measurement model of SSCM practices are as follows: validity of each construct. Finally convergent validity of ten con-
c2 ¼ 262.295, df ¼ 153, p ¼ 0.00, c2/df ¼ 1.714, RMR ¼ 0.047, structs was also assessed with the help of average variance
GFI ¼ 0.906, AGFI ¼ 0.871, NFI ¼ 0.910, TLI ¼ 0.950, CFI ¼ 0.960, extracted (AVE). AVE indicates the average variance that a construct
RMSEA ¼ 0.053. The above values indicate fulfillment of threshold is able to extract from each measurement item that loads on it. The
value on almost all GOF indices (Hair et al., 2009). Similarly CFA ten constructs have AVE ranging from 0.460 to 0.697 as shown in
carried out on the items of SSCM performance reduced the number the last row of Table 2. AVE of 0.5 or more of a construct indicates
of items from 26 to 20. GOF measures of the measurement model of satisfactory level of convergent validity (Hair et al., 2009). Nine
SSCM performance measures turn out to be: c2 ¼ 346.378, df ¼ 149, constructs have more than the threshold level of AVE, thus indi-
p ¼ 0.00, c2/df ¼ 2.325, RMR ¼ 0.06, GFI ¼ 0.883, AGFI ¼ 0.835, cating very strong convergent validity of the above constructs. Only
NFI ¼ 0.905, TLI ¼ 0.927, CFI ¼ 0.943, RMSEA ¼ 0.072. This model Operations practices (OP) construct is found to have an AVE of
also indicates reasonably good fit to almost all GOF indices. The 0.460, which is somewhat below the threshold value. However,
results of the two measurement models establish unidimension- since this construct meets the criteria of convergent validity in the
ality of both the scales. first two methods, OP construct is considered to possess an
A composite measurement model combining the scales of both acceptable level of convergent validity.
SSCM practices and SSCM performance measures was also found
out by carrying out CFA on all ten constructs simultaneously. GOF 5.3.4. Discriminant validity
indices of the composite measurement model are as follows: Discriminant validity is a measure of how a construct is distinct
c2 ¼ 1346.002 df ¼ 707, p ¼ 0.00, c2/df ¼ 1.904, RMR ¼ 0.064, from other constructs in the same model and whether each
GFI ¼ 0.805, AGFI ¼ 0.770, NFI ¼ 0.830, TLI ¼ 0.892, CFI ¼ 0.905, construct is measuring different concepts (Hair et al., 2009).
RMSEA ¼ 0.060. Conventional cut-off criteria of GOF indices seem Discriminant validity was also assessed by following three different
to be excessively stringent as observed by Sharma et al. (2005). approaches. The first method involves investigation of correlation
More liberal cut-off values should be used for normed fit indices between each pair of constructs in the CFA model. If the correla-
such as GFI and TLI, where factors such as model complexity, tions between constructs are well below 0.9, then there is very little
number of observed variables and sample size are taken into ac- possibility that a group of items loading significantly on one
count. A comparable result has also been reported in the extant construct would also load on another construct (Kline, 2005).
literature (Rao and Holt, 2005; Vachon and Klassen, 2006; Zhu Table 2 indicates that none of the correlations are nearer to 0.9. This
et al., 2008a; Singh et al., 2011). The present findings indicate suggests that the items are unidimensional. The second method
reasonably good fit to the above indices. The results of this com- entails examining chi-square differences separately between all
posite measurement model were utilized to establish construct pairs of constructs of SSCM practices and SSCM performance by
reliability and all remaining measures of validity. considering two constructs at a time. The two constructs would be
considered distinct if the null hypothesis is rejected which states
that the two constructs together form a single construct. A pair-
5.3.2. Reliability wise comparison of constructs was carried out by comparing the
In the present study, two estimates of reliability: Cronbach’s model with correlation constrained to one with an unconstrained
alpha coefficient and construct reliability coefficient (Hair et al., model. A difference between chi-square values (d.f. ¼ 1) of the two
2009) were computed. Threshold value of Cronbach’s ά. has models that is significant at p < 0.05 level indicates support for
already been mentioned earlier for a scale to be considered reliable. discriminant validity (Anderson and Gerbing, 1988; Joreskog, 1971).
Similarly if the value of construct reliability coefficient turns out to Table 3 reports the results of 45 pair-wise tests of discriminant
be 0.7 or higher, the scale is considered reliable (Hair et al., 2009). validity for SSCM practices and SSCM performance measures. All
The estimate of construct reliability is considered a composite chi-square differences are found significant at p < 0.001 level,
measure of reliability. The calculated values of the composite indicating strong support for discriminant validity.
measure of reliability are very close to the values of Cronbach’s ά as The final method involves comparison of AVE of each construct
reported in Table 1. It is observed that all coefficients are more than with the shared variance of each pair of constructs as shown in
the threshold value 0.7 thereby indicating sound construct reli- Table 2. The diagonal values indicate square root of AVE while the
ability of all constructs. off-diagonal values indicate correlation of each pair of constructs. If
Table 1
Assessment of reliability and convergent validity of the constructs of SSCM practices & SSCM performance.
Construct Number of items Alpha (ά) Reliability Construct Reliability NFI NNFI
Environmental Management Practices (EMP) 6 0.893 0.886 0.918 0.880

Operations Practices (OP) 5 0.811 0.795 0.960 0.944
Supply Chain Integration (SCI) 3 0.751 0.753 0.951 0.955
Socially Inclusive Practices for Employees (SPE) 3 0.835 0.849 0.961 0.944
Socially Inclusive Practices for Community (SPC) 3 0.860 0.865 0.961 0.944
Competitiveness (CP) 6 0.909 0.908 0.956 0.942
Environmental Performance (EPR) 5 0.901 0.909 0.968 0.947
Operations Performance (OPR) 3 0.835 0.872 0.946 0.942
Employee-centred Social Performance (CSP) 3 0.821 0.829 0.954 0.933
Community-centred Social Performance (ESP) 3 0.842 0.844 0.954 0.933
Table 2
Results of Convergent, Discriminant, Nomological validity of the constructs of SSCM practices & SSCM performance.
Construct (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
EMP (1) 0.752

OP (2) 0.715 0.678
(***)
SCI (3) 0.708 0.770 0.710
(***) (***)
SPE (4) 0.761 0.677 0.683 0.809
(***) (***) (***)
SPC (5) 0.577 0.432 0.363 0.555 0.827
(***) (***) (***) (***)
CP (6) 0.638 0.625 0.630 0.529 0.343 0.788
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
EPR (7) 0.498 0.442 0.325 0.487 0.355 0.593 0.817
(***) (***) (**) (***) (***) (***)
OPR (8) 0.449 0.468 0.500 0.296 0.232 0.739 0.432 0.834
(***) (***) (***) (***) (**) (***) (***)
ESP (9) 0.424 0.556 0.291 0.518 0.388 0.521 0.705 0.372 0.787
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
CSP (10) 0.558 0.416 0.377 0.490 0.677 0.604 0.715 0.422 0.665 0.802
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
Firm size 0.186 0.140 0.076 0.098 0.268 0.168 0.164 0.132 0.065 0.182
(**) (*) (*) (*) (*) (*) (**)
AVE 0.566 0.460 0.505 0.655 0.684 0.622 0.668 0.697 0.620 0.643
Diagonal elements (shaded) are the square root of average variance extracted (AVE) and the off-diagonal elements represent correlations between constructs.
***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.
Table 3
Assessment of discriminant validity of the constructs of SSCM practices & SSCM performance.
Construct (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10)
EMP (1) e
OP (2) 67.9 e
(***)
SCI (3) 58.1 48.4 e
(***) (***)
SPE (4) 51.2 40.0 64.4 e
(***) (***) (***)
SPC (5) 50.3 58.5 74.7 55.4 e
(***) (***) (***) (***)
CP (6) 67.3 85.1 70.9 85.2 87.4 e
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
EPR (7) 70.3 95.3 99.6 69.2 69.4 64.4 e
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
OPR (8) 79.6 96.2 75.2 106.7 91.5 53.7 75.1 e
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
ESP (9) 96.4 107.1 127.8 46.5 90.9 95.5 62.6 107.3 e
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
CSP (10) 53.6 86.7 82.8 65.3 26.6 54.9 33.5 67.7 50.8 e
(***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***) (***)
***p < 0.001.
the square root of AVE of each construct is more than the correla- assigned to them (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). Close observation of
tion of each pair of constructs, then this implies that the constructs Table 2 reveals that almost all values of square root of AVE of the
account for a greater proportion of variance of the items that are constructs are more than their corresponding correlation with all
other constructs. This indicates strong discriminant validity of all several researchers (Marrelec et al., 2007; Marrelec and Benali,
constructs. 2009) in which partial correlation was first carried out in the
relevant variables in order to uncover the significant or insignifi-
5.3.5. Nomological validity cant nature of relationships. Based on the outcome of partial cor-
This test of validity seeks to determine whether the correlation relation and previous knowledge of literature, SEM was applied
between each pair of constructs in the measurement model is amongst the selected variables. Marrelec et al. (2007) and Marrelec
consistent with the existing theory and whether the correlations and Benali (2009) argued that this approach would enhance both
are significant and positive. The correlation between each pair of empirical and theoretical support of the study findings.
constructs considering both SSCM practices and SSCM performance The result of the present findings reveals that 12 correlations are
measures has been shown in the off-diagonal elements of Table 2 significant out of 25 correlations. The insignificant nature of rela-
along with their respective p values. It is observed out of 45 tionship between the remaining pairs of predictor and criteria
inter-construct correlations, 43 correlations are significant at variables suggests that they are somewhat unrelated and capture
p < 0.001 level and two correlations are significant at p < 0.01 level. dissimilar elements of SSCM practices and SSCM performance. For
It can thus be inferred that almost all inter-construct correlations example, if we consider the association between SPE and EPR, SPE
are significant and positive. This phenomenon ensures support for indicates the social practices adopted by a firm for its employees
nomological validity of both the scales of SSCM practices and SSCM while EPR represents environmental performance of a firm. The
performance (Hair et al., 2009; Singh et al., 2011). extant literature does not seem to indicate any significant associ-
ation between these unrelated pairs of predictor and criteria vari-
5.3.6. Criterion-related validity ables. These revelations provide us an insight about identifying
This test of validity indicates how well a scale representing the hypothesized relationships between specific pairs of predictor and
constructs of various practices is related to performance (Flynn criteria variables. Further out of 12 significant correlations, two are
et al., 1994; Ahire et al., 1996; Chen and Paulraj, 2004a). In other contrary to our expectations: one between EMP and CSP and
words, it attempts to ascertain whether the correlation between another between OP and ESP. The contents of each pair of these
the pair of a predictor and criterion variable is significant. In the constructs seem to be disconnected to each other. This does not
present study, the predictor variables are indicated through five invalidate the present findings since the theoretical support for the
SSCM practices: environmental management practices (EMP), op- above association is unlikely to be found in the literature. At the
erations practices (OP), supply chain integration (SCI), socially in- same time, we observe that most of the significant correlations
clusive practices for employees (SPE), and socially inclusive obtained in the present study have theoretical support as we
practices for the community (SPC). The criteria variables are rep- discuss the same in the next section. We can thus infer that the
resented through five SSCM performance measures: competitive- constructs of SSCM practices and SSCM performance have an
ness (CP), environmental performance (EPR), operations acceptable level of criterion-related validity. Appendix F shows the
performance (OPR), employee-centred social performance (ESP), final parsimonious instrument containing both SSCM practices and
and community-centred social performance (CSP). To establish SSCM performance.
criterion-related validity, partial correlation is carried out between
each pair of a predictor variable and a criterion variable after con- 6. Discussion and implications for theory and practice
trolling for the effect of other predictor variables. For example, for
finding out the partial correlation between EMP and CP, we The present study has tried to integrate the concepts of SCM, ISO
controlled for the effect of other four predictor variables. This ex- 14001, and CSR by borrowing the elements from diverse literature.
ercise was repeated for all pairs of predictor and criteria variables. Subsequently it has developed and validated a scale comprising five
For doing this, we initially considered the reduced set of variables of constructs of SSCM practices and another five constructs of SSCM
SSCM practices and also the variables of SSCM performance ob- performance. The behavior of these ten constructs of SSCM was
tained through CFA. These observed variables of SSCM practices examined through 45 inter-construct correlations as shown in
and performance were separately subjected to factor analysis Table 2 and mentioned in the nomological validity section. The
which eventually gave rise to the same five constructs of SSCM pattern of correlations revealed in the present findings resembles
practices and another five constructs of SSCM performance. All the pattern of relationships available in the existing literature.
these constructs were treated as variables: the constructs of SSCM Further a close look at the ten significant correlations shown in
practices as predictor variables and those of SSCM performance as Table 4 reveals that the correlation between EMP and EPR is posi-
criteria variables. With the help of these predictor and criteria tive and significant which supports the findings of Rao et al. (2009),
variables, partial correlation is found out. This is shown in Table 4. Yang et al. (2011), and Green Jr. et al. (2012). The correlation be-
The outcome of the whole effort reveals whether the relation- tween EMP and OPR is positive and significant which is mostly in
ship between the pair of a predictor variable and a criterion variable tune with the findings of Gonza lez-Benito and Gonza lez-Benito
is significant or not which helps us in getting an insight about their (2005) and Rao et al. (2009). Further the correlation between
possible association. Similar kind of approach was adopted by EMP and CP is positive and significant which corroborates the
Table 4
Assessment of Criterion-related validity between the constructs of SSCM practices & SSCM performance.
Predictor Variable Criteria Variables
CP EPR OPR ESP CSP
EMP 0.336 (***) 0.241 (**) 0.164 (**) 0.047 0.244 (***)
OP 0.264 (***) 0.001 0.141 (*) 0.242 (***) 0.016
SCI 0.298 (***) 0.011 0.251 (***) 0.080 0.103
SPE 0.203 (**) 0.115 0.089 0.331 (***) 0.015
SPC 0.069 0.072 0.018 0.053 0.561 (***)
***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.

findings of Rao and Holt (2005), Rao et al. (2009) etc. The significant supports the findings of Zhu et al. (2008a, 2012) and Green Jr. et al.
positive correlation between OP and CP supports the findings of (2012). Similarly competitiveness construct of the present finding
Kannan and Tan (2005) and Li et al. (2006) while the significant seems to be in harmony with the findings of Tracey et al. (1999),
positive correlation between SCI and CP in the present study re- Rao and Holt (2005), Li et al. (2006), and Rao et al. (2009). The
inforces the findings of Kannan and Tan (2005) and Lii and Kuo contents of social performance construct in the existing literature
(2016). The correlation between OP and OPR is significant and mostly reflect the improvement in organizational performance as a
positive which is consistent with the findings of Kaynak (2003). result of socially inclusive practices undertaken (Mani et al., 2016a,
Similar outcome is also obtained between SCI and OPR which 2016b; Zhu et al., 2016). The present finding in respect of social
echoes the findings of Lii and Kuo (2016). The pair between SPE and performance construct is a departure from the earlier findings in
CP exhibits significant positive correlation in the present study. This the sense that it captures the improvement in the status of em-
is somewhat in harmony with the findings of Zhu et al. (2016) ployees and the community in terms of their health, education,
which reveals that the labour practices significantly influence living condition and economic opportunities. This may be consid-
financial performance of a firm. Finally the significant positive ered a new development in terms of identification of social per-
correlation between SPE and ESP closely resembles the findings of formance construct. The improved social condition of the
Zhu et al. (2016) which argues that the human rights of employees employees and the community would help researchers in investi-
have significant positive association with the social performance of gating its impact on the competitiveness of a firm. Till date, there
a firm. The above revelation suggests that although the survey was are very few studies available which have developed a scale
carried out amongst manufacturing and process-based organiza- considering the relevant constructs of both SSCM practices and
tions in India, the behavior of the constructs demonstrates a SSCM performance. The scale developed in the current study
discernible pattern of relationships and thus the instrument could combines both SSCM practices and SSCM performance and is ex-
also be utilized among the companies in the developed countries pected to make a significant contribution to the existing body of
including the E.U. and the U.S. SCM literature.
The first stage of the scale development involves identification The study was carried out amongst manufacturing and pro-
of the items relevant to SSCM practices and SSCM performance cessing companies which include automobiles, auto-components,
from literature across diverse disciplines. This was followed by CFA engineering goods, consumer electronics and electricals, IT and
through which the instrument was rigorously tested for unidi- telecom products, textiles, consumer goods; processing steel and
mensionality, reliability, convergent validity, discriminant validity, steel products; processing oil, gas and petroleum products;
nomological validity, and criterion-related validity. CFA results in generating and distributing power etc. The scale developed in this
purification of the constructs of SSCM practices and SSCM perfor- study is considered to be more or less generalized in nature and is
mance through which ten items of SSCM practices and six items of applicable in the above categories of industries. As regards the
SSCM performance were discarded. However, the underlying applicability of the scale in certain sectors including food and
theoretical constructs of the refined scale were not significantly beverages, perishable agricultural commodities, pharmaceutical
affected. Thus the instrument developed in this study is considered products covering both drugs and vaccine, there are specific re-
to be parsimonious. The scale consists of five constructs of SSCM quirements for these industries in terms of safety, security and
practices including one construct of environmental practices perishability of products which need to be considered during the
(EMP), two constructs of operations practices (OP and SCI) and two scale development phase. These aspects should be considered in
constructs of socially inclusive practices (SPE and SPC). Further the conjunction with the scale developed in the present study in order
scale comprises another five constructs of SSCM performance to make the instrument applicable to the above industries. Alter-
including one construct of environmental performance (EPR), one natively, a new scale of SSCM dedicated towards food and bever-
construct of operations performance (OPR), one construct of ages sector or pharmaceutical sector could be developed keeping in
competitiveness (CP) and two constructs of social performance mind the specificity needs of a particular industry. This may be
(ESP and CSP). considered as a scope for future research work.
When the present findings in respect of SSCM practices The managers involved in implementing SSCM practices and
construct are compared with the earlier findings, it is found in the evaluating the performance of a firm on SSCM dimensions would
previous research that environmental/green practices construct be in a position to keep track of the status of SSCM implementation
alone is represented by five constructs (Zhu et al., 2008a, 2008b; practices and would also be able to assess the performance of the
2012; Green Jr. et al., 2012), operations practices construct is firm on different aspects of SSCM with the help of this validated
shown through six constructs (Li et al., 2005, 2006) and social instrument. Based on the status of SSCM practices followed and the
practices construct is manifested through nine constructs (Zhu performance outcome on different aspects of SSCM, managers
et al., 2016). Although these constructs of the earlier findings would be able to suggest which particular aspects of SSCM require
individually cover almost all aspects of a particular dimension, they more attention by the top management and wherein more re-
do not include all relevant elements of SSCM practices in isolation. sources need to be allocated for satisfactory implementation and
The purpose of the present study was to develop a parsimonious performance outcomes. Further depending on the competitive
scale which would include the relevant items of SSCM practices and priorities of an organization, managers would be able to take a
SSCM performance. Thus the study initially incorporated all perti- judicious decision in respect of resource allocation among the
nent items of SSCM from literature along the whole supply chain. broad three dimensions of sustainability with the help of this
Subsequently the purification process resulted in elimination of instrument.
few items. This, however, did not significantly alter the content of
the scale and simultaneously maintain the parsimonious nature of 7. Concluding remarks
the scale.
As regards the dimension of SSCM performance constructs, While developing the scale, the researcher has attempted to
environmental performance construct in the current study findings examine the overall level of SSCM practices amongst
is found to be in tune with the findings of Zhu and Sarkis (2007), manufacturing and processing companies in India and China. Chi-
Zhu et al. (2008a, 2008b, 2012), and Green Jr. et al. (2012). Opera- nese manufacturing companies attach top priority to the economic
tions performance construct of the present finding partially performance which has resulted in severe ecological burden on the
surrounding environment. This has led to the emergence of market management results in manufacturing competitiveness of a firm. In
pressure, regulatory pressure, and competitive pressure which has the context of CSR, Saeidi et al. (2015) empirically demonstrated
prompted the Chinese companies to adopt GSCM practices (Zhu that CSR practices of a firm have significant positive impact on
and Sarkis, 2007; Zhu et al., 2007, 2008b; 2008c; Liu et al., 2012). customer satisfaction, reputation, competitive advantage, and firm
It is found that except ‘internal environmental management’, none performance. An organization which cares for its employees and
of the elements of GSCM practices have received adequate atten- recognizes their talent becomes one of the preferred employers of
tion by the Chinese companies. Further the level of adoption of the talented workforce (Welford and Frost, 2006). On the contrary,
GSCM practices varies across different industries in China (Zhu Nike’s unethical treatment of overseas workers had initially tar-
et al., 2008b). Overall the Chinese companies are still at a pre- nished the image of Nike worldwide, although it was successful in
liminary stage in respect of adoption of GSCM practices when the achieving operational efficiency by outsourcing its manufacturing
same is compared with the companies based in the US or the EU in the far east (https://en......../Nike-sweatshops). The above argu-
(Zhu et al., 2007, 2008b; 2008c; Liu et al., 2012; Esfahbodi et al., ments indicate that an organization cannot afford to ignore its
2016). As regards the adoption of CSR practices among Chinese reluctance or inability to adopt green practices and ill-treat its
firms, it is found that the practices falling under employee rights workers and the surrounding community and at the same time
and labour practices have received satisfactory attention while the merely focus on improving the operational efficiency of its supply
same falling under community issues and fair operating practices chain. There is a compelling need to simultaneously incorporate
have not received adequate attention by the Chinese state-owned both environmental and social aspects along with the economic
companies (Zhu and Zhang, 2015; Zhu et al., 2016). As far as the aspect in today’s supply chain. The present work is an endeavor
adoption of GSCM practices by Indian manufacturing and pro- towards that direction, although it is somewhat difficult to capture
cessing companies is concerned, the same is still at an early stage. every facet of SSCM in its embryonic stage. We believe that the
Regulatory environment in India does not enforce the companies to scale development is an ongoing process. The present study is an
adopt GSCM practices. There are not enough pressures from cus- early attempt in developing and validating a scale of SSCM which
tomers and competitors. However, collaborative relationship with can act as a trigger for future researchers in further enriching and
suppliers in respect of adoption of environmentally-friendly prac- refining the scale by carrying out experiments across different
tices results in sustainable product design and logistics, which, in settings. We feel that the boundary of the domain of SSCM could be
turn, leads to improved competitiveness and economic perfor- expanded further by incorporating several important elements: (1)
mance (Mitra and Datta, 2014). With regard to the social sustain- mitigating risk of supply disruption due to reduced supplier base,
ability practices by Indian firms, it is found that the issues relating (2) managing risks emanating from NGOs, competitors etc. (3) the
to the payment of minimum wages, equity, health and safety, practice of reuse and recycle and also recycling efficiency, (4)
working condition, labour rights, education and training are not innovation for sustainability and (5) technology as an enabler of
properly addressed by the top management (Mani et al., 2016a, sustainability.
2016b). As supply chain partners collaborate and tend to develop long-
Despite the maturity level of sustainability practices of the term relationships, the overall supply base drastically reduces.
companies located in the emerging economies being low, the same Thus the supply chain becomes vulnerable which eventually in-
is getting more and more relevant in today’s context in view of creases the risk of supply disruption. Several researchers (Beske
evolving environmental norms, sensitivity of customers towards and Seuring, 2014; Beske et al., 2014) suggested the inclusion of
environmentally-friendly products, regulatory pressure in respect this phenomenon into sustainable supply chain. Future study
of environment, and CSR in the globalized business environment. should take care of this issue. Further as the supply chain becomes
Companies can no longer afford to relegate environmental and sustainable, it comes under close scrutiny of several pressure
social practices to the back seat, if they aspire to survive and grow groups including NGOs, competitors etc. Pagell and Wu (2009),
in the long run. In this context, the scale developed in this paper is Beske and Seuring (2014), and Beske et al. (2014) recommended
expected to be of great help to the practicing managers which the influence of pressure groups to be one of the important drivers
would enable them to observe the level of environmental and social of SSCM. Future researchers should endeavor to incorporate and
practices adopted by a firm and also evaluate firm performance on operationalize this element into sustainable supply chain. Reuse
different aspects of SSCM. and recycle of existing products are practiced in some specific in-
The most pressing challenge faced by us in this study is the dustries. This includes automobiles, consumer electronics etc. Re-
identification of the content of SSCM practices and SSCM perfor- searchers (Ahi and Searcy, 2013, 2015) advocated the application of
mance for inclusion of the same in the instrument. The special issue recycling efficiency in assessing the effectiveness of recycling. This
of the Journal of Cleaner Production titled ‘Sustainability and Supply particular element could be taken up for specific group of industries
Chain Management’ (Huisingh, 2008) has defined SSCM as “the in which the practice of reuse and recycle is prevalent. As regards
management of material and information flows as well as cooperation innovation for sustainability, the findings of Klewitz and Hansen
among companies along the supply chain while taking goals from all (2014) revealed that sustainability-oriented innovation in terms
three dimensions of sustainable development, i.e. economic, environ- of process innovation, organizational innovation, and product
mental and social, and stakeholder requirements into account”. The innovation greatly improves the sustainability goal of a firm. Thus
definition implies that the entire domain is very broad and en- sustainability-oriented innovation is considered to be one of the
compasses a wide range of topics including environmental man- important drivers for achieving the goal of sustainable develop-
agement, CSR, supply chain integration etc. These topics apparently ment (Kılkıs, 2016). Janeiro and Patel (2015) argued that the choice
seem to be disjointed and have emerged from different disciplines of technology, specifically sustainable technology has a great
under different contexts. However, all of them are demonstrating a bearing on the three dimensions of sustainability. Therefore, envi-
trend towards convergence in the context of today’s supply chain ronmental, social and economic indicators need to be taken into
environment. For example, Rao and Holt (2005) revealed that green account while choosing a sustainable technology. Tho €ni and Tjoa
practices adopted by a green supply chain leads to improved (2015) articulated that the information technology could act an
competitiveness and economic performance of a firm. Yang Chen- enabler for achieving the goal of SSCM. The aforesaid discussion
Lung et al. (2010) argued that environmental management in demonstrates that it is possible to incorporate the above elements
conjunction with continuous improvement and supplier into the scale of SSCM with suitable adaptation. This may be
considered as a scope for future research in expanding the Finally, a structural model is expected to be developed based on
boundary of knowledge of SSCM. the findings of the measurement model. The structural model
The study suffers from several limitations. First, the sample size would attempt to investigate the impact of different dimensions of
of respondents belonging to different group of industries is not SSCM practices on operations performance, environmental per-
uniform which might make the study findings somewhat biased formance, social performance, and firm competitiveness. This is
towards a particular sector. Second, the organizations chosen being taken up in another study.
belong to heterogeneous sectors. The maturity level of SSCM
practices varies widely across different types of industries. The
study has tried to draw a generalization of the findings based on the
Acknowledgement
responses of heterogeneous industries. Probably the findings
would have shown more consistent pattern, had the study been
The author acknowledges the financial support provided by
confined to one type of industry and the responses were collected
Indian Council of Social Science Research (ICSSR), New Delhi for
from those firms which belong to that particular industry. Third,
carrying out this research.
the content of SSCM practices scale has tried to incorporate the
items from all three dimensions of sustainability and at the same
time it has attempted to become parsimonious. Thus the scale
might not have included all relevant items of SSCM practices as Appendix A. Descriptive statistics of variables of SSCM
already mentioned. However, the study findings, being one of the practices
initial attempts in designing a scale of SSCM, could serve as a basis
for future research in this direction.
Variables relating to SSCM practices Min score Max score Mean Std. Dev.
With reference to the adoption of SSCM practices, the organization does the following
(1) Not at all true, (2) Scarcely true, (3) Somewhat true, (4) Considerably true, (5) Absolutely true
Top management is highly committed towards implementation of SSCM programs in our 1 5 3.88 1.018
organization.
We receive adequate support from middle level managers for actual implementation of SSCM 1 5 3.52 0.930
practices.
We follow Quality Management system (QMS) in its true spirit to build quality into the product. 1 5 3.89 0.972
We facilitate our suppliers implement TQM/Six sigma/TPM/TQC to build quality into the product. 1 5 3.62 0.984
We facilitate our suppliers in carrying out Value Engineering to reduce the cost of components. 1 5 3.58 0.883
We follow Just-in-time/Scientific inventory control technique consistently to keep inventory under 1 5 3.60 1.010
control in the production environment.
We have implemented lean production and follow it consistently to minimize waste. 1 5 3.50 1.031
We attempt to achieve economies of scale in inbound and or outbound transportation. 1 5 3.63 0.886
We update our production plan as per the changing needs of customers and share the same with 1 5 3.82 0.974
suppliers.
We establish frequent contact with supply chain members. 1 5 3.82 0.986
Our organization responds to the needs of customers fairly quickly by keeping adequate amount of 1 5 3.74 0.987
finished goods inventory.
We estimate customers’ future needs based on realistic assessment. 1 5 3.87 1.034
We communicate customers’ future needs to the suppliers quickly. 1 5 3.92 0.965
Environmental management systems (EMS) are in place in our organization in terms of ISO 14001 1 5 3.98 1.016
certification or any comparable EMS.
We provide design specification to suppliers that include environmental compliance for purchased 1 5 3.67 1.109
item.
We help suppliers set up environmental management system /get ISO 14001 certification. 1 5 3.64 1.088
We address environmental concerns of our customers in terms of eco-friendly design/distribution of 1 5 3.82 0.962
products.
We address environmental concerns of our customers by adopting cleaner production. 1 5 3.82 1.018
We have successfully designed our products which consume reduced amount of input materials 1 5 3.71 1.027
/energy.
We utilize a sizeable share of renewable sources of energy. 1 5 3.35 1.129
We have successfully avoided or reduced the use of hazardous materials in both product design and 1 5 3.59 1.079
manufacturing process.
The safety measures undertaken by our organization are quite advanced and reduce the risk to 1 5 3.97 0.928
accident.
Our organization provides safe, healthy and positive working environment for the employees. 1 5 4.10 0.932
Use of child labour and forced labour is not allowed in our organization. 1 5 4.50 0.943
Our employees enjoy the right to form and join trade unions and bargain collectively. 1 5 3.28 1.342
The wages and perquisites given out to the employees, particularly to the workers are sufficient to 1 5 3.96 0.999
meet their basic needs in our organization.
Our employees are entitled to leave, provident fund, medical benefits and other facilities. 1 5 4.37 0.963
We provide employment/business opportunities to the surrounding community. 1 5 3.69 0.928
We provide health care facilities to the local community. 1 5 3.60 1.011
We provide primary education facilities to the surrounding people. 1 5 3.39 1.021
*We have sound network with retailers and 3 PL service providers to take back products from
customers.
*We address environmental concerns of customers through green packaging
*We design products which are reusable/recoverable/recyclable
*These items were dropped after carrying out initial pilot test.
Appendix B. Descriptive statistics of SSCM performance of products and does not incorporate social or environmental
variables goals. Today’s supply chain has to behave in a socially and envi-
ronmentally responsible manner, which has given rise to the
SSCM Performance variables Min score Max score Mean Std. Dev.
By adopting SSCM practices, the organization has achieved the following

(1) Not at all true, (2) Scarcely true, (3) Somewhat true, (4) Considerably true, (5) Absolutely true
Decrease in the cost of production. 1 5 3.36 1.081
Reduction in the cost of energy consumption. 1 5 3.72 0.890
Improvement in the efficiency of inbound logistics. 1 5 3.67 0.906
Improvement in the efficiency of outbound logistics. 1 5 3.63 0.891
Increase in on-time delivery of goods to its customers. 1 5 3.85 0.989
Improvement in the level of service with the same amount or even lesser amount of inventory. 1 5 3.79 0.989
Improvement in the quality of products and services. 1 5 3.82 0.912
Improvement in the overall productivity/capacity utilization of our organization. 1 5 3.82 0.894
Improvement in the competitive advantage of our firm in terms of providing differentiated products to its customers. 1 5 3.77 0.880
Retention of existing customer base. 1 5 3.82 0.894
Increased opportunity for our firm to target and capture new customers. 1 5 3.70 0.972
Improvement in the corporate image of our firm in terms of the same being green. 1 5 3.86 0.931
Reduction in the cost of effluent treatment and effluent discharge in our organization. 1 5 3.47 0.979
Reduction in the discharge of toxic materials (solid and liquid and gases). 1 5 3.79 1.000
Reduction in the frequency of environmental accident. 1 5 3.82 1.012
Reduction in the frequency of accidents occurring in the shop-floor. 1 5 3.70 0.972
Protection of bio-diversity in the surrounding area. 1 5 3.79 1.005
Improvement in the corporate image of our firm in terms of the same being responsible towards its employees. 1 5 3.81 0.955
Reduction in inequity in remuneration and other perquisites given to the employees of the same level. 1 5 3.42 1.050
Reduction in the differences in compensation package admissible to the employees of different hierarchy to a significant level. 1 5 3.10 1.183
Improvement in the working environment of our organization and morale of its employees to a considerable level. 1 5 3.55 0.898
Improvement in the living condition, education, nutrition and health of the employees in our organization. 1 5 3.54 0.939
Improvement in the corporate image of our firm in terms of the same being responsible towards the community. 1 5 3.84 0.920
Improvement in the opportunities of the surrounding community in respect of employment/business. 1 5 3.60 0.974
Improvement in the literacy/level of education of the surrounding people. 1 5 3.36 1.048
Increase in the proportion of time the surrounding people remain free from ailments due to improved health care facilities. 1 5 3.45 1.048
Appendix C. A brief note on Sustainable Supply Chain

Management (SSCM) for the respondents
concept of Sustainable Supply Chain Management (SSCM). In
Sustainability or Sustainable Development is a burning issue in other words, SSCM attempts to integrate all three dimensions of
today’s business and social environment in view of the rampant sustainability and then tries to achieve economic goal, social goal
degradation of ecological environment and violation of human and environmental goal of an organization across its whole supply
rights occurring all over the globe. The unbridled economic growth chain.
has led to the huge exploitation of natural and mineral resources In reality, most of the organizations very often do not use the
and at the same time made the planet earth heavily polluted due to term SSCM explicitly while undertaking pro-active measures for
the emission of toxic gases and dumping of solid and liquid wastes. minimizing negative environmental impact or addressing the
Keeping this trend of development in mind, World Commission on needs of the employees and the community by practicing
Environment and Development (1987) provided a classic definition Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). However, they do follow
of Sustainable Development as “the development that meets the various dimensions of SSCM practices simultaneously. For
needs of present generation without compromising the ability of example, there are many organizations which have already
future generations to satisfy their legitimate needs”. This docu- adopted ISO 14000 standards for environmental management
ment, also known as Brundtland report, subsequently served as the systems and ISO 26000 standards for social responsibility while
basis for sustainability across the globe. Sustainability has got three pursuing the activities in their supply chain. Similarly, there are
dimensions: economic, social and environmental, which in other other organizations which have implemented Green SCM (GSCM)
words, implies that all these three dimensions require adequate in respect of environmental stewardship and simultaneously
attention by the policy planners for maintaining harmony and adopted CSR practices in their supply chain. These organizations
achieving the goal of long-term development. seem to have introduced the components of SSCM practices
Mere pursuit of economic goal by an organization is not a sound although there might be lack of coordination between different
decision alternative from long-term sustainability and profitability departments responsible for institutionalization of GSCM prac-
point of view if the same results in irreversible damages in the tices and CSR practices. The present study considers these orga-
environment and fails to secure safety, security, healthcare, mini- nizations undertaking both GSCM practices and CSR practices to
mum wages, better working conditions for its employees, and have introduced SSCM practices and plans to confine the study to
better living condition for the surrounding community at large. these organizations only. The study aims to assess the extent of
Therefore, it has become imperative for any organization to behave introduction of SSCM practices on its different facets in an orga-
in a socially and environmentally responsible manner while trying nization. In addition, it also attempts to evaluate the performance
to achieve its economic goals. of the organization on all three dimensions of sustainability as a
Supply Chain Management (SCM) primarily focusses on the result of undertaking SSCM practices.
economic goals right from sourcing of inputs to the final delivery
Appendix D. Number of Responding Organizations based on

manpower
Manpower Strength Frequency Percentage
Less than 100 12 4.7

100 to <500 27 10.6
500 to <1000 19 7.5
1000 to <5000 48 18.8
5000 to <10000 43 16.9
10000 to <20000 11 4.3
20000 to <50000 63 24.7
Above 50000 32 12.5
Total 255 100.0
Appendix E. Number of responding organizations based on

turnover
Turnover (in Cr. Rs.) Frequency Percentage
<Rs.100 Cr. 12 4.7

Rs.100 Cr. to < Rs. 500 Cr. 23 9.0
Rs.500 Cr. to < Rs.1000 Cr. 17 6.7
Rs.1000 Cr. to < Rs.5000 Cr. 61 23.9
Rs.5000 Cr. to < Rs.10000 Cr. 11 4.3
Rs. 10000 Cr. to < Rs.20000 Cr. 8 3.1
Rs.20000 Cr. to < Rs.50000 Cr. 89 34.9
Above Rs. 50000 Cr. 34 13.3
Total 255 100.0
Appendix F. Final parsimonious instrument
SSCM practices
Environmental management practices (EMP)
EMP1 EMSs are in place in our organization in terms of ISO 14001 certification or any comparable EMS.
EMP2 We provide design specification to suppliers that include environmental compliance for purchased item.
EMP3 We help suppliers set up environmental management system /get ISO 14001 certification.
EMP4 We address environmental concerns of our customers in terms of eco-friendly design/distribution of products.
EMP5 We address environmental concerns of our customers by adopting cleaner production.
EMP6 We have successfully designed our products which consume reduced amount of input materials /energy.
Operations practices (OP)
OP1 We facilitate our suppliers implement TQM/Six sigma/TPM/TQC to build quality into the product
OP2 We facilitate our suppliers in carrying out Value Engineering to reduce the cost of components.
OP3 We follow Just-in-time/Scientific inventory control technique consistently to keep inventory under control in the production environment.
OP4 We have implemented lean production and follow it consistently to minimize waste.
OP5 We attempt to achieve economies of scale in inbound and or outbound transportation.
Supply chain integration(SCI)
SCI1 We update our production plan as per the changing needs of customers and share the same with suppliers.
SCI2 Our organization responds to the needs of customers fairly quickly by keeping adequate amount of inventory
SCI3* We estimate customers’ future needs based on realistic assessment.
SCI4 We communicate customers’ future needs to the suppliers quickly.
Socially inclusive practices for employees (SPE)
SPE1 The safety measures undertaken by our organization are quite advanced and reduce the risk to accident.
SPE2 Our organization provides healthy and positive working environment for the employees.
SPE3* Use of child labour and forced labour is not allowed in our organization.
SPE4 The wages and perquisites given out to the employees are sufficient to meet their basic needs in our organization.
SPE5* Our employees are entitled to leave, provident fund, medical benefits and other facilities.
Socially inclusive practices for community (SPC)
SPC1 We provide employment/business opportunities to the surrounding community.
SPC2 We provide health care facilities to the local community.
SPC3 We provide primary education facilities to the surrounding people.
SSCM performance measures
Competitiveness (CP)
CP1 Improvement in the level of service with the same or even lesser amount of inventory.
CP2 Improvement in the quality of products and services.
(continued on next page)
(continued )
CP3 Improvement in the overall productivity/capacity utilization of the organization.

CP4 Improvement in the competitive advantage of the firm in terms of providing differentiated products to its customers.
CP5 Retention of existing customer base.
CP6* Increased opportunity for the firm to target and capture new customers.
CP7 Improvement in the corporate image of the firm in terms of the same being green.
Environmental performance (EPR)
EPR1 Reduction in the cost of effluent treatment and effluent discharge.
EPR2 Reduction in the discharge of toxic materials (solid and liquid and gases).
EPR3 Reduction in the frequency of environmental accident.
EPR4 Reduction in the frequency of accidents occurring in the shop-floor.
EPR5 Protection of bio-diversity in the surrounding area.
Operations performance (OPR)
OPR1 Decrease in the cost of production.
OPR2* Reduction in the cost of energy consumption.
OPR3 Improvement in the efficiency of inbound logistics.
OPR4 Improvement in the efficiency of outbound logistics.
Employee-centred social performance (ESP)
ESP1 Reduction in inequity in remuneration and other perquisites given to the employees of the same level.
ESP2 Reduction in the differences in compensation package admissible to the employees of different hierarchy.
ESP3 Improvement in the working environment of the organization and morale of its employees to a considerable level.
Community-centred social performance (CSP)
CSP1* Improvement in the corporate image of the firm in terms of the same being responsible towards the community.
CSP3 Improvement in the opportunities of the surrounding community in respect of employment/business.
CSP4 Improvement in the literacy/level of education of the surrounding people.
CSP5 Increase in the proportion of time the surrounding people remain free from ailments due to improved health care facilities.
*The items were dropped while carrying out CFA on the items.
References www.economictimes.indiatimes.com/marketstats/pid-56..........year-2014.cms
Accessed 20 December 2014.
Elkington, J., 2004. Enter the triple bottom line. In: Henriques, A., Richardson, J.
Ahi, P., Searcy, C., 2013. A comparative literature analysis of definitions for green and
(Eds.), The Triple Bottom Line: Does it All Add up? Earthscan, London, pp. 1e16.
sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 52, 329e341.
Esfahbodi, A., Zhang, Y., Watson, G., 2016. Sustainable supply chain management in
Ahi, P., Searcy, C., 2015. An analysis of metrics used to measure performance in
emerging economies: trade-offs between environmental and cost performance.
green and sustainable supply chains. J. Clean. Prod. 86, 360e377.
Int. J. Prod. Econ. 181 (Part B), 350e366.
Ahire, S.L., Golhar, D.Y., Waller, M.Y., 1996. Development and validation of TQM
Flynn, B.B., Schroeder, R.G., Sakakibara, S., 1994. A framework for quality manage-
implementation constructs. Decis. Sci. 27 (1), 23e56.
ment research and an associated measurement instrument. J. Oper. Manag. 11
Anderson, J.C., Gerbing, D.W., 1988. Structural equation modeling in practice: a
(4), 339e366.
review and recommended two-step approach. Psychol. Bull. 103 (3), 411e423.
Fornell, C., Larcker, D.F., 1981. Evaluating structural equation models with unob-
Barney, J.B., 1991. Firm resources and sustained competitive advantage. J. Manag. 17
servable variables and measurement error. J. Mark. Res. 18 (1), 39e50.
(1), 99e120.
Gerbing, D.W., Anderson, J.C., 1988. An updated paradigm for scale development
Barton, H., 2000. Conflicting Perceptions of Neighbourhood. In: Barton, H. (Ed.),
incorporating unidimensionality and its assessment. J. Market. Res. 25 (2),
Sustainable Communities. Earthscan, London, pp. 3e18.
186e192.
Behncke, F.G.H., Maisenbacher, S., Maurer, M., 2014. Extended model for value en-
Giddings, B., Hopwood, B., O’Brien, G., 2002. Environment, economy and society:
gineering. Procedia Comput. Sci. 28, 781e788.
fitting them together into sustainable development. Sustain. Dev. 10 (4),
Beske, P., Seuring, S., 2014. Putting sustainability into supply chain management.
187e196.
Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 19 (3), 322e331.
Giovanni, P. De, 2012. Do internal and external environmental management
Beske, P., Land, A., Seuring, S., 2014. Sustainable supply chain management practices
contribute to the triple bottom line? Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 32 (3), 265e290.
and dynamic capabilities in the food industry: a critical analysis of the litera-
Gold, S., Hahn, R., Seuring, S., 2013. Sustainable supply chain management in ‘Base
ture. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 152, 131e143.
of the Pyramid’ food projects e a path to triple bottom line approaches for
Boyd, D.E., Spekman, R.E., Kamauff, J.W., 2007. Corporate social responsibility in
multinationals? Int. Bus. Rev. 22 (5), 784e799.
global supply chains: a procedural justice perspective. Long. Range Plann 40 (3),
Golicic, S.L., Smith, C.D., 2013. A meta-analysis of environmentally sustainable
341e356.
supply chain management practices and firm performance. J. Supply Chain
Cagliano, R., Caniato, F., Spina, G., 2006. The linkage between supply chain inte-
Manag. 49 (2), 78e95.
gration and manufacturing improvement programmes. Int. J. Oper. Prod.
Gonzalez-Bento, J., Gonz alez-Bento, O., 2005. Environmental proactivity and busi-
Manag. 26 (3), 252e299.
ness performance: an empirical analysis. Omega 33 (1), 1e15.
Carter, C.R., Easton, P.L., 2011. Sustainable supply chain management: evolution and
Grant, R.M., 1991. The resource-based theory of competitive advantage. Calif.
future directions. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag 41 (1), 46e62.
Manag. Rev. 33 (3), 114e135.
Carter, C.R., Rogers, D.S., 2008. A framework of sustainable supply chain manage-
Green Jr., K.W., Zelbst, P.J., Meacham, J., Bhadauria, V.S., 2012. Green supply chain
ment: moving toward new theory. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag 38 (5),
management practices: impact on performance. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 17
360e387.
(3), 290e305.
Chase, R.B., Shankar, R., Jacobs, F.R., 2014. Operations and Supply Chain Manage-
Gupta, S., Palsule-Desai, Omkar D., 2011. Sustainable supply chain management:
ment. 14e. McGraw Hill Education (India) Private Ltd, New Delhi.
review and research opportunities. IIMB Manag. Rev. 23 (4), 234e245.
Chen, I.J., Paulraj, A., 2004a. Towards a theory of supply chain management: the
Hair Jr., J.F., Black, W.C., Babin, B.J., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L., 2009. Multivariate
constructs and measurements. J. Opera. Manag. 22 (2), 119e150.
Data Analysis, sixth ed. Pearson Education, New Delhi.
Chen, I.J., Paulraj, A., 2004b. Understanding supply chain management: critical
Harms, D., Hansen, E.G., Schaltegger, S., 2013. Strategies in sustainable supply chain
research and a theoretical framework. Int. J. Prod. Res. 42 (1), 131e163.
management: an empirical investigation of large German companies. Corp. Soc.
Corbett, C.J., Klassen, R.D., 2006. Extending the horizons: environmental excellence
Respon. Environ. Manag. 20 (4), 205e218.
as a key to improving operations. Manufact. Servi. Opera, Manag. 8 (1), 5e22.
Hart, S.L., 1995. A natural-resource-based view of the firm. Acad. Manag. Rev. 20 (4),
Cronbach, L.J., 1951. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psycho-
986e1014.
metrika 16 (3), 297e334.
Haughton, G., 1999. Environmental justice and the sustainable city. J. Plann. Edu.
Darnall, N., Jolley, G.J., Handfield, R., 2008. Environmental management systems and
Res. 18 (3), 233e243.
green supply chain management: complements for sustainability. Bus. Strat.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nike_sweatshops Accessed 20 June 2015.
Environ 17 (1), 30e45.
https://cscmp.org/imis0/CSCMP/Educate/SCM_Definitions_and_Glossary_of_Terms/
Diabat, A., Govindan, K., 2011. An analysis of the drivers affecting the imple-
CSCMP/Educate/SCM_Definitions_and_Glossary_of_Terms.aspx?
mentation of green supply chain management. Resour. Conserv. Recycl 55 (6),
hkey¼60879588-f65f-4ab5-8c4b-6878815ef921 Accessed 12 November 2016.
659e667.
Huisingh, D., 2008. Sustainability and supply chain management e an introduction
Duarte, A.P., Gomes, D.R., Neves, J.G.das, 2014. Tell me your socially responsible
to the special issue (Editorial). J. Clean. Prod. 16, 1545e1551.
practices, I will tell you how attractive for recruitment you are! the impact of
Hutchins, M.J., Sutherland, J.W., 2008. An exploration of measures of social sus-
perceived CSR on organizational attractiveness. Tekhne e Rev. Appl. Manag.
tainability and their application to supply chain decisions. J. Clean. Prod. 16 (15),
Studies 12 (1), 22e29.
1688e1698. Mitra, S., Datta, P.P., 2014. Adoption of green supply chain management practices
Ibusuki, U., Kaminski, P.C., 2007. Product development process with focus on value and their impact on performance: an exploratory study of Indian
engineering and target-costing: a case study in an automotive company. Int. manufacturing firms. Int. J. Prod. Res. 52 (7), 2085e2107.
J. Prod. Econ. 105 (2), 459e474. Montabon, F., Pagell, M., Wu, Z., 2016. Making sustainability sustainable. J. Supply
Janeiro, L., Patel, M.K., 2015. Choosing sustainable technologies: implications of the Chain Manag. 52 (2), 11e27.
underlying sustainability paradigm in the decision making process. J. Clean. Nunnally, J.C., 1978. Psychometric Theory, second ed. McGraw Hill, New York.
Prod. 105, 438e446. Pagell, M., 2004. Understanding the factors that enable and inhibit the integration
Joreskog, K.G., 1971. Statistical analysis of sets of congeneric tests. Psychometrika 36 of operations, purchasing and logistics. J. Oper. Manag. 22 (5), 459e487.
(2), 109e133. Pagell, M., Wu, Z., 2009. Building a more complete theory of sustainable supply
Kannan, V.R., Tan, K.C., 2005. Just in time, total quality management and supply chain management using case studies of 10 exemplars. J. Supply Chain Manag.
chain management: understanding their linkages and impact on business 45 (2), 37e56.
performance. Omega 33 (2), 153e162. Park, H.G., Lee, Y.J., 2015. The efficiency and productivity analysis of large logistics
Kaynak, H., 2003. The relationship between total quality management practices and service providers services in Korea. Asian J. Shipp. Logist 31 (4), 469e476.
their effects on firm performance. J. Oper. Manag. 21 (4), 405e435. Podsakoff, P.M., Mackenzie, S.B., Lee, J.Y., Podsakoff, N.P., 2003. Common method
Kim, Dong-Young, Kumar, V., Kumar, U., 2012. Relationship between quality man- biases in behavioural research: a critical review of the literature and recom-
agement practices and innovation. J. Oper. Manag. 30 (4), 295e315. mended remedies. J. Appl. Psychol. 88 (5), 879e903.
Klassen, R.D., McLaughlin, C.P., 1996. The impact of environmental management on Porter, M.E., 1991. America’s green strategy. Sci. Am. 264 (4), 168.
firm performance. Manag. Sci. 42 (8), 1199e1214. Porter, M.E., Kramer, M.R., 2011. Creating shared value. Harv. Bus. Rev. 89 (1/2),
Klassen, R.D., Whybark, D.C., 1999. The impact of environmental technologies on 62e79.
manufacturing performance. Acad. Manag. J. 42 (6), 599e615. Porter, M.E., van der Linde, C., 1995. Green and competitive: ending the stalemate.
Kleindorfer, P.R., Singhal, K., Wassenshove, L.N.V., 2005. Sustainable operations Harv. Bus. Rev. 73, 120e133.
management. Prod. Oper. Manag. 14 (4), 482e492. Power, D., 2005. Supply chain management integration and implementation: a
Klewitz, J., Hansen, E.G., 2014. Sustainability-oriented innovation of SMEs: a sys- literature review. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 10 (4), 252e263.
tematic review. J. Clean. Prod. 65, 57e75. Pullman, M.E., Maloni, M.J., Carter, C.R., 2009. Food for thought: social versus
Kline, R.B., 2005. Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, second ed. environmental sustainability practices and performance outcomes. J. Supply
Guilford Press, New York. Chain Manag. 45 (4), 38e54.
Krause, D.R., Pagell, M., Curkovic, S., 2001. Toward a measure of competitive pri- Rao, P., Holt, D., 2005. Do green supply chains lead to competitiveness and eco-
orities for purchasing. J. Oper. Manag. 19 (4), 497e512. nomic performance. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 25 (9), 898e916.
Krause, D.R., Vachon, S., Klassen, R.D., 2009. Special topic forum on sustainable Rao, P., Singh, A.K., Castillo, O.L.O., Intal Jr., P.S., Sajid, A., 2009. A metric for corporate
supply chain management: introduction and reflections on the role of pur- environmental indicators….for small and medium enterprises in the
chasing management. J. Supply Chain Manag. 45 (4), 18e25. Philippines. Bus. Strat. Environ 18 (1), 14e31.
Kılkıs, S., 2016. Sustainability-oriented innovation system analyses of Brazil, Russia, www.iimb.ernet.in/research/sites/default/files/WP%20No.%20428_0.pdf Accessed
India, China, South Africa, Turkey and Singapore. J. Clean. Prod. 130, 235e247. 30 December 2014.
Laosirihongthong, T., Adebanjo, D., Tan, K.C., 2013. Green supply chain management Saeidi, S.P., Sofian, S., Saeidi, P., Saeidi, S.P., Saaeidi, S.A., 2015. How does corporate
practices and performance. Ind. Manag. Data Syst. 113 (8), 1088e1109. social responsibility contribute to firm financial performance? The mediating
Li, S., Rao, S.S., Raghu-Nathnan, T.S., Raghu-Nathnan, B., 2005. Development and role of competitive advantage, reputation and customer satisfaction. J. Bus. Res.
validation of a measuring instrument for studying supply chain management 68 (2), 341e350.
practices. J. Oper. Manag. 23 (6), 618e641. Seuring, S., Müller, M., 2008. From a literature review to a conceptual framework for
Li, S., Raghu-Nathnan, B., Raghu-Nathnan, T.S., Rao, S.S., 2006. The impact of supply sustainable supply chain management. J. Clean. Prod. 16 (15), 1699e1710.
chain management practices on competitive advantage and organizational Sharma, S., Mukherjee, S., Kumar, A., Dillon, W.R., 2005. A simulation study to
performance. Omega 34 (2), 107e124. investigate the use of cutoff values for assessing model fit in covariance
Lii, P., Kuo, Fang-I., 2016. Innovation-oriented supply chain integration for combined structure models. J. Bus. Res. 58 (7), 935e943.
competitiveness and firm performance. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 174, 142e155. Sheu, J.B., Chen, Y., 2014. Transportation and economies of scale in recycling low-
Linton, J.D., Klassen, R., Jayaraman, V., 2007. Sustainable supply chains: an intro- value materials. Transp. Res. Part B 65, 65e76.
duction. J. Oper. Manag. 25 (6), 1075e1082. Shrivastava, P., 1995. Environmental technologies and competitive advantage.
Liu, X., Yang, J., Qu, S., Wang, L., 2012. Sustainable production: practices and Strateg. Manag. J. 16 (51), 183e200.
determinant factors of green supply chain management of Chinese companies. Simchi-Levi, D., Kaminsky, P., Simchi-Levi, E., Shankar, R., 2008. Designing and
Bus. Strat. Environ 21 (1), 1e16. Managing the Supply Chain, third ed. Tata McGraw Hill, New Delhi.
Lu, Rainy X.A., Lee, Peter K.C., Cheng, T.C.E., 2012. Socially responsible supplier Simpson, D.F., Power, D.J., 2005. Use the supply relationship to develop lean and
development: construct development and measurement validation. Int. J. Prod. green suppliers. Supply Chain Manag. Int. J. 10 (1), 60e68.
Econ. 140 (1), 160e167. Singh, P.J., Power, D., Chuong, S.C., 2011. A resource dependence theory perspective
Lόpez-Gamero, M.D.L., Molino-Azorin, J.F.M., Claver-Cortes, E.C., 2009. The whole of ISO 9000 in managing organizational environment. J. Oper. Manag. 29 (1e2),
relationship between environmental variables and firm performance: 49e64.
competitive advantage and firm resources as mediator variables. J. Environ. Snell, S.A., Dean Jr., J.W., 1992. Integrated manufacturing and human resource
Manag. 90 (10), 3110e3121. management: a human resource perspective. Acad. Manag. J. 35 (3), 467e504.
Mackay, A., Mackay, T.B., Barney, J.B., 2007. Corporate social responsibility and firm Tan, K.C., Kannan, V.R., Handfield, R.B., Ghosh, S., 1999. Supply chain management:
performance: investor preferences and corporate strategies. Acad. Manag. Rev. an empirical study of its impact on performance. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 19
32 (3), 817e835. (10), 1034e1052.
Malhotra, N.K., Dash, S., 2009. Marketing Research, fifth ed. Pearson Education, New Tan, K.C., Lyman, S.B., Wisner, J.D., 2002. Supply chain management: a strategic
Delhi. perspective. Int. J. Oper. Prod. Manag. 22 (6), 614e631.
Mani, V., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Hazen, B., Dubey, R., 2016a. Supply Tho€ni, A., Tjoa, A.M., 2015. Information technology for sustainable supply chain
chain social sustainability for developing nations: evidence from India. Resour. management: a literature survey. Enterp. Inf. Syst. 1e31. http://dx.doi.org/
Conserv. Recycl 111, 42e52. 10.1080/17517575.2015.1091950.
Mani, V., Agarwal, R., Gunasekaran, A., Papadopoulos, T., Dubey, R., Childe, S.J., www.toyota-global.com/company/vision_philosophy/toyota_production_system/
2016b. Social sustainability in the supply chain: construct development and just-in-time.html Accessed 12 November 2016.
measurement validation. Ecol. Indic. 71, 270e279. Tracey, M., Vonderembse, M.A., Lim, J.S., 1999. Manufacturing technology and
Markman, G.D., Krause, D., 2016. Theory building surrounding sustainable supply strategy formulation: keys to enhancing competitiveness and improving per-
chain management: assessing what we know, exploring where to go (Special formance. J. Oper. Manag. 17 (4), 411e428.
topic forum). J. Supply Chain Manag. 3e10. Vachon, S., Klassen, R.D., 2006. Extending green practices across the supply chain.
Marrelec, G., Benali, H., 2009. A theoretical investigation of the relationship be- Int. J. Opera. Prod. Manag. 26 (7), 795e821.
tween structural equation modeling and partial correlation in functional MRI Vachon, S., Mao, Z., 2008. Linking supply chain strength to sustainable develop-
effective connectivity. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2009/ ment: a country-level analysis. J. Clean. Prod. 16 (15), 1552e1560.
369341. Vickery, S.K., Jayaram, J., Droge, C., Calantone, R., 2003. The effects of an integrative
Marrelec, G., Horwitz, B., Kim, J., Pele
grini-Issac, M., Benali, H., Doyon, J., 2007. Using supply chain strategy on customer service and financial performance: an
partial correlation to enhance structural equation modeling of functional MRI analysis of direct versus indirect relationships. J. Oper. Manag. 21 (5), 523e539.
data. Magn. Reson. Imaging 25, 1181e1189. Walker, H., Seuring, S., Sarkis, J., Klassen, R.D., 2014. Sustainable operations man-
Marshall, D., McCarthy, L., Heavey, C., McGrath, P., 2014. Environmental and social agement: recent trends and future directions (Guest editorial). Int. J. Oper. Prod.
supply chain management sustainability practices: construct development and Manag. 34 (5).
measurement. Prod. Plann. Contr 26 (8), 673e690. World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED), 1987. Our Common
McGuire, J.B., Sundgren, A., Schneeweis, T., 1988. Corporate social responsibility and Future. Oxford University Press, Oxford and New York.
firm financial performance. Acad. Manag. J. 31 (4), 854e872. Welford, R., Frost, S., 2006. Corporate social responsibility in Asian supply chains.
Mefford, R.N., 2011. The economic value of a sustainable supply chain. Bus. Soc. Rev. Corp. Soc. Respon. Environ. Manag. 13 (3), 166e176.
116 (1), 109e143. White, R.E., Pearson, J.N., Wilson, J.R., 1999. JIT manufacturing: a survey of imple-
Mehra, S., Inman, R.A., 1992. Determining the critical elements of Just-In-Time mentations in small and large U.S. manufacturers. Manag. Sci. 45 (1), 1e15.
implementation. Decis. Sci. 23 (1), 160e174. Winter, M., Knemeyer, A.M., 2013. Exploring the integration of sustainability and
supply chain management. Int. J. Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag 43 (1), 18e38. Chinese manufacturing enterprises. J. Oper. Manag. 22 (3), 265e289.
Wittstruck, D., Teuteberg, F., 2012. Understanding the success factors of sustainable Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., 2007. The moderating effects of institutional pressures on
supply chain management: empirical evidence from the electrics and elec- emergent green supply chain practices and performance. Int. J. Prod. Res. 45
tronics industry. Corp. Soc. Respon. Environ. Manag. 19 (3), 141e158. (18e19), 4333e4355.
Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., Roos, D., 1991. The Machine that Changed the World: the Zhu, Q., Zhang, Q., 2015. Evaluating practices and drivers of corporate social re-
Story of Lean Production. Harper Perennial. sponsibility: the Chinese context. J. Clean. Prod. 100, 315e324.
Wu, Z., Pagell, M., 2011. Balancing priorities: decision making in sustainable supply Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K.H., 2007. Green supply chain management: pressures,
chain management. J. Oper. Manag. 29 (6), 577e590. practices and performance within the Chinese automobile industry. J. Clean.
Wu, T., Shen, H., Zhu, C., 2015. A multi-period location model with transportation Prod. 15 (11e12), 1041e1052.
economies-of-scale and perishable inventory. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 169, 343e349. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K.H., 2008a. Confirmation of measurement model for green
Yang, Chen-Lung, Lin, S.P., Chan, Y.H., Sheu, C., 2010. Mediated effect of environ- supply chain management practices implementation. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 111 (2),
mental management on manufacturing competitiveness: an empirical study. 261e273.
Int. J. Prod. Econ. 123 (1), 210e220. Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K.H., 2008b. Green supply chain management implications for
Yang, M.G., Hong, P., Modi, S.M., 2011. Impact of lean manufacturing and environ- closing the loop. Transp. Res. Part E 44, 1e18.
mental management on business performance: an empirical study of Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Cordeiro, J.J., Lai, K.H., 2008c. Firm-level correlates of emergent
manufacturing firms. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 129 (2), 251e261. green supply chain management practices in the Chinese context. Omega 36
Zailani, S., Jeyaraman, K., Vengadasan, G., Premkumar, R., 2012. Sustainable supply (4), 577e591.
chain management (SSCM) in Malaysia: a survey. Int. J. Prod. Econ. 140 (1), Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., Lai, K.H., 2012. Examining the effects of green supply chain
330e340. management practices and their mediations on performance improvements.
Zhou, G., Min, H., Xu, C., Cao, Z., 2008. Evaluating the comparative efficiency of Int. J. Prod. Res. 50 (5), 1377e1394.
Chinese third party logistics providers using data envelopment analysis. Int. J. Zhu, Q., Liu, J., Lai, K.H., 2016. Corporate social responsibility practices and perfor-
Phys. Distrib. Logist. Manag. 38 (4), 262e279. mance improvement among Chinese national state-owned enterprises. Int. J.
Zhu, Q., Sarkis, J., 2004. Relationships between operational practices and perfor- Prod. Econ. 171 (Part 3), 417e426.
mance among early adopters of green supply chain management practices in

SSCM Variable

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

SSCM Variable

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

SSCM Variable

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Cleaner Production 164 (2017) 1344e1362

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Journal of Cleaner Production

Development and validation of a scale for measuring Sustainable

1. Introduction mitigate negative environmental impact on the surrounding area, it

Environmental Management Practices (EMP) 6 0.893 0.886 0.918 0.880

EMP (1) 0.752

***p < 0.001.

Predictor Variable Criteria Variables

CP EPR OPR ESP CSP

***p < 0.001, **p < 0.01, *p < 0.05.

By adopting SSCM practices, the organization has achieved the following

Appendix C. A brief note on Sustainable Supply Chain

Appendix D. Number of Responding Organizations based on

Manpower Strength Frequency Percentage

Less than 100 12 4.7

Appendix E. Number of responding organizations based on

Turnover (in Cr. Rs.) Frequency Percentage

<Rs.100 Cr. 12 4.7

Appendix F. Final parsimonious instrument

CP3 Improvement in the overall productivity/capacity utilization of the organization.

You might also like

p < 0.001, p < 0.01, p < 0.05.