Sustainable Supply Chain Management Process - Coursework Example

Sustainable supply chain management Name Instructor Course Institution, State Introduction Sustainable supply chain management (SSCM) has become a major study area in contrast to when people were discouraged from it. Concerns have grown, therefore, giving reasons to focus on various issues including social and environment issues. The progress is inclined to heighten the abnormalities linked to supply chains whereby they additionally become sustainable. However, the problems of producing a sustainable supply virtually remain questionable. A sustainable supply chain should not have harm to the natural or the social system but should have willing customers to continue carrying business forever (Burch et al. 2013). SSCM is used in research for both noneconomic and economic influences on the supply chain. SSCM is incorporated in SCM research which focuses on social and environmental apparatus of deals with the environmental or social apparatus execution. Detaching of SSCM will result to most of ongoing research ignoring environmental and social impacts in relation to supply chain activities. In the same regard, it is to be expected that such would also create non-performance in management of supply chain systems. It is evident that SSCM supply chains are not sustainable. Apparently, sustainability portrays an objectively important desire that require a change in low supply chains management. Supply chains do not without change of business practices as well as representation to focus on their harmful social and environmental effects. It has been found out that for the study to offer a helping hand in the formation of actually sustainable SSCM, the distinction of SSCM requirements to last part. SCM study will have to take the supply chain’s communal and environmental activities more similarly applicable than the economic performance (Wolf 2011). Sustainable supply chain management For researchers to reach a point of no further making a separation of SSCM and SCM study there is a need to tackle five vital concerns. Previous research hare said to have repeatedly been more persistent on the synergistic and recognizable trade-offs and other drastic innovations. Among these perceptions, there are ways and issues that do not confine a supply chain effects and ways which are healthier at looking back than forward (Coughlan & Coghlan 2002). First issue- harm lessening is not harm eradication Owing to the fact the supply chains are not currently sustainable; most of SSCM study has been persistent on destruction decline in supply chains. Any practises should have a positive impact on economic and environmental outcomes. Decline in destruction is more frequently imminent from supply chains whose production of services would only use capital more fats than their degree of its replacement. Giving the example of an automobile supply chain that creates a car that consumes a significant amount of non-renewable capital in its lifecycle though its production has no harming effect to the environment (Wolf 2011). Pronounced transformation in business representation will have an impact on its productivity chain that create no harm and may have an optimistic or negative impact on communal and environmental system. Extent study has been more determined on creation of unsustainable supply chain and also making it to be less unsustainable and then offering a limited way on how to generate no harm to the environment (Carter & Easton 2011). Second- issue a limited stakeholder view- the dominance of returns The process of dealing with environmental or communal implications positively impacted on proceeds in a manner to expand authority in a field that was alleged that such activities will harm profits. It is apparent that it does not pay to be sustainable; however, profits are the ultimate consideration of supply chain routine while managers and shareholders are the largely significant stakeholders in the supply chain (Kolk 2012). According to researcher, if a claim has a depressing effect on its economic bottom line then it is assumed as unsustainable not considering how valuable it is for societal or environmental performance and practices. The SSCM’s environmental and social dimensions ought to be undertaken using a more definite and apparent acknowledgment of the economic goal of the organization. Authors of different books establish that all supply chains occasionally have no preference, but to accept new rehearsal that have a pessimistic or indecisive effect on the financial venture. Literature provides incomparability to stakeholder claim other than proceeds. In the SSCM fiction, there is a wide and often implied receipt of the possibility that returns are the eventual measure of supply chain performance (Carter & Easton 2011). Future study will then have to clearly recognise the allege of stakeholders not taking account of a financial risk in the chain while treating these claims as similarly applicable to economic assert therefore begin to focus on methods to deal with conditions that can create synergies (Burch et al. 2013). Third issue-a focus on the familiar The process of putting more focus on synergies is clear to studies that are more concerned with the impact of the environment or social outcomes. Connectively, such studies also deal with how we update an existing tool to deal with changed expectations (Wolf 2011). Organizational exercises such as obligation to workforce and ethical procurement are often developed to achieve a particular economic goal. However, sometimes they are inclined to have an adverse effect to the financial bottom line of the organization (Carter & Easton 2011). Researchers may however miss the critical new methods since they may have positive fiscal and noneconomic significance on the chain presentation that may improve the bottom line. Scholars suggest that sustainability is a fundamental way of giving opinion about supply management. It is achievable to improve consideration of ways to generate truthfully sustainable supply chain that will guide to the expansion of new methods. SSCM research examines the methods that are accepted within conventional business models, through history; there are identified essential advance that are likely to emanate from new participant as compared to existing organization. It is possible for researcher to overlook a significant chance to influence the potential custom and expansion of fresh supply chain, if they maintain to carry out study that focuses on how distinctions on active practices will impact on the capability of unsustainable supply chains (Kolk 2012). Fourth issue- the confines of empiricism as most current practice it The biggest shifts in supply chain preparation involve the understanding of organization such as lean production and superiority management. According to paradigm shifts that were industry guide, they were followed by academia. Most active study technique especially the critical methods are involved with the subject such as quality management was the rationale for the extension of SCM field from its historical analytical roots whereby it will include research traditions. Nevertheless, experimental tools can still be an obstacle to advancing the awareness that is required to generate a sustainable supply chain. The description of rigor that often includes; a huge model size that is a representative of the generally population through the application of previous validated channels (Wolf 2011). The practice of studying average marks give limited knowledge on ways to accomplish outcomes that are not ordinary or how to generate a supply that is unique from the current unsustainable custom. Such studies are said to ignore the radically dissimilar by either eliminating all outliers or get an average from a large sample given a case study (Coughlan & Coghlan 2002). Most qualitative methods can be firm on the supply chains that may be overlooked or be discharged in qualitative studies. However, most empirical study set out to tackle what was different in SSCM that is required by firms to change their practices, therefore, allowing them discover them. Sustainability is about change and keeping up-to-date with the dynamic world as well as the business filed. The management supply chain tools have made significant contributions on following the supply chains more sustainable and also ensure rigor and then learning how to create a sustainable supply chain (Burch et al. 2013). Fifth issue- measuring supply chain impacts Managers use profitably to assess the success of supply chain impacts; however, their perception on environmental and social issue may not give a valid answer. This is mainly because what is suitable in these areas may not be as per the inspection of other stakeholders. substantial development has been achieved in forming a valid and a more purpose measure of noneconomic outcomes that are connected with sustainability that are support on managerial insight by applying the use of secondary data. The process has their limitations that they are not measures of full chain effects but tend to have an artificial superior limit. Taking the examples of safety regulators and toxic release inventory data it is apparent that they are restricted to one relation in the chain. When such a study establishes that condensed toxic discharges are linked with advanced proceeds, it is assumed that the condensed emissions are a pointer of better environmental presentation for the chain (Carter & Easton 2011). Secondly a more subtle limitation mainly focuses on the impacts that the measures habitually place an artificial greater border on performance. A company can achieve when gauging a worker protection with a zero accidents statistics; however, many stakeholders view no harm as a lower limit of tolerable performance not an upper limit. Other existing measures can distinguish between the virtual stages of harm that are formed by a sole link in the supply chain. Such measure does not capture the whole chain’s effect or tolerate for examination of chains that have advanced beyond where there are no effects toward being regenerative or having positive effects. For effective research to be conducted there must be a standard that should be applied to give efficient means, therefore, easy to publish the results of the study. The above five issue discussed are all interrelated in describing what a suitable supply chain does (Coughlan & Coghlan 2002). Recommended solution Through carefully analysis of choices that may be taken by managers, it is proposed that there be a requirement of changing norms, methods, measurement and research questions. The process of shifting the customs and the assumption of the field is complicated yet the expedition is said to have already begun which was more determined on buying practices and thorough study in analytical issues. The issues needs a blend of evolutionary and revolutionary transforms such as manner research that tend to guide to practice that are dangerous particularly for fresh study (Coughlan & Coghlan 2002).Today researcher can take diverse steps to address the issues raised; first they should start asking different questions and establish whether sustainability offers any returns or whether supply chains are sustainable or misguided. Researcher should focus more on creating a supply chain that is sustainable which should be a transition from the difficulty of ‘does it pay’ to the problem ‘how to be sustainable’ (Hart & Milstein 2003). The process of adopting a more multi-disciplinary research that concentrates at the supply chain from the scrutiny of other stakeholders such as the communities, NGO’s, the governments and other ordinary systems. The chains function as a critical constituent of creating a realization of how to turn into sustainable. The primary interest in the multidisciplinary research should be to refrain, however, ensure that the motivation is different thereby ensuring that the interest lie in capturing new stakeholders standpoint and also investigative possible trade-offs (Kolk 2012). Conclusion The process of ensuring one gets ahead of practise and looking the supply chain from the new perspective will allow the expansion of SSCM understanding. People should be open to participating to the type of research and work with managers to create and carry out tests for new practices. Connectively, the process of inviting researcher from diverse fields to participate in changing their efforts in vigorous ways should be adopted. The research filed has a long way to go to ensure that there is a managerial practice towards creating a truly sustainable supply chains, through the aim of trying to rectify the identified assumptions, institutions, norms, measures and methods (Carter & Easton 2011).These trouble grow from a limited stakeholder focal point; the suggested solution to the challenges would be successful if applied, therefore, having an effective leadership from scholars, mentors and reviewers. The practice of sourcing SCM research can be of importance to an organization change to truly sustain supply chains (Wolf 2011). References Burch, D., Dixon, J., & Lawrence, G 2013, Introduction to symposium on the changing role of supermarkets in global supply chains: From seedling to supermarket: Agri-food supply chains in transition. Agriculture and Human Values, 30, 215–224. Carter, C. R., & Easton, P 2011, Sustainable supply chain management: Evolution and future directions. International Journal of Physical Distribution and Logistics Management, 41 (1), 46–62 Coughlan, P., & Coghlan, D 2002, Action research for operations management. International Journal of Operations and Production Management, 22, 220–240. Eesley, C., & Lenox, M 2006, Firm responses to secondary stakeholder action. Strategic Management Journal, 27, 765–781. Hart, S. L., & Milstein, M 2003, Creating sustainable value. The Academy of Management Executive, 17 (2), 56–67. Kolk, A 2012, towards a sustainable coffee market: Paradoxes faced by a multinational company. Corporate Social Responsibility and Environmental Management, 19, 79–89 Wolf, J 2011, Sustainable supply chain management integration: A qualitative analysis of the German manufacturing industry. Journal of Business Ethics, 102, 221–235. Read More