How does adopting sustainable supply chain quality management improve corporate financial performance? A transaction cost perspective
-
Author(s)Anass TouilLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0001-3343-4927
,
Aziz Babounia
,
Nabil El HamidiLink to ORCID Index: https://orcid.org/0009-0008-6647-0212
-
DOIhttp://dx.doi.org/10.21511/imfi.21(3).2024.15
-
Article InfoVolume 21 2024, Issue #3, pp. 170-186
- 192 Views
-
48 Downloads
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
This article examines the impact of adopting SSCQM on the financial performance of companies, based on transaction theory. The main objective of this study is to assess how reducing transactional costs through SSCQM, or within its framework, can improve the financial performance of Moroccan companies. The methodology is based on quantitative analysis, using an econometric model (GLM-Gamma) to test the association between SSCQM adoption and financial performance. The results of the study show that various SSCQM-related practices positively affect companies’ financial performance. Managing sourcing costs significantly improves profit margins. Contracts focusing on quality and sustainability, and minimizing the risk of non-compliance, also boost financial performance. However, the ability to adapt and respond to regulatory changes shows no significant impact. Optimizing production processes and investing in green technologies are proving to be profitable strategies, with significant improvements in financial performance. Customer engagement and transparency and traceability of operations also have a positive impact. These results suggest that SSCQM practices, such as the adoption of green technologies and transparency policies, are beneficial for companies’ financial performance. The originality of the study lies in its approach, which links transaction theory to sustainable supply chain management, an angle little explored in existing literature. The study confirms that SSCQM is an effective strategy for improving corporate financial health by minimizing transactional costs. It recommends integrating SSCQM into companies’ management strategies to boost their competitiveness, financial performance and sustainability.
- Keywords
-
JEL Classification (Paper profile tab)M11, Q56, L23, G32
-
References41
-
Tables13
-
Figures4
-
- Figure 1. Distribution of the dependent variable
- Figure 2. PP plot
- Figure 3. Residual distribution
- Figure 4. Hat-Matrix
-
- Table 1. Hypotheses and the associated variables
- Table 2. Questionnaire response rate
- Table 3. Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis (convergent validity, Cronbach’s alpha, reliability composite and AVE)
- Table 4. Results of Confirmatory Factor Analysis (discriminant validity)
- Table 5. Heteroskedasticity test: Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey
- Table 6. Ramsey RESET test for OLS
- Table 7. Choice of control variables
- Table 8. Ramsey RESET test after adding control variables
- Table 9. Comparison of distributions
- Table 10. Ramsey RESET for GLM regression
- Table 11. Variance Inflation Factors (VIF) for the GLM-Gamma regression
- Table 12. Heteroscedasticity test: Breusch-Pagan-Godfrey
- Table 13. GLM-Gamma regression results
-
- Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, R., Sallam, K., & Elhoseny, M. (2020). A novel decision-making model for sustainable supply chain finance under uncertainty environment. Journal of Cleaner Production, 269.
- Ansari, Z. N., & Kant, R. (2017). A state-of-art literature review reflecting 15 years of focus on sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 142, 2524-2543.
- Bastas, A., & Liyanage, K. (2018). Sustainable supply chain quality management: A systematic review. Journal of Cleaner Production, 181, 726-744.
- Berrone, P., Fosfuri, A., Gelabert, L., & Gomez-Mejia, L. R. (2013). Necessity as the mother of ‘green’inventions: Institutional pressures and environmental innovations. Strategic Management Journal, 34(8), 891-909.
- Carter, C. R., & Rogers, D. S. (2008). A framework of sustainable supply chain management: moving toward new theory. International Journal of Physical Distribution & Logistics Management, 38(5), 360-387.
- Coase, R. (1991). The institutional structure of production. Journal des Economistes et des Etudes Humaines [Journal of Economic and Humanities Studies], 2(4), 431-440.
- Gardner, T. A., Benzie, M., Börner, J., Dawkins, E., Fick, S., Garrett, R., &Wolvekamp, P. (2019). Transparency and sustainability in global commodity supply chains. World Development, 121, 163-177.
- Glas, A. H., Henne, F. U., & Essig, M. (2018). Missing performance management and measurement aspects in performance-based contracting: A systematic process-based literature analysis of an astonishing research gap. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 38(11), 2062-2095.
- Graham, S., Graham, B., & Holt, D. (2018). The relationship between downstream environmental logistics practices and performance. International Journal of Production Economics, 196, 356-365.
- Grimard, A., Lake, S., Mardas, N., Godar, J., & Gardner, T. (2017). Supply chain transparency network: State of play. In Global Canopy Programme & Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI), Stockholm (pp. 70-77).
- Halldórsson, Á., Kotzab, H., & Skjøtt-Larsen, T. (2009). Supply chain management on the crossroad to sustainability: a blessing or a curse? Logistics Research, 1, 83-94.
- Hart, S. L., & Dowell, G. (2011). Invited editorial: A natural-resource-based view of the firm: Fifteen years after. Journal of Management, 37(5), 1464-1479.
- Hennig-Thurau, T., & Klee, A. (1997). The impact of customer satisfaction and relationship quality on customer retention: A critical reassessment and model development. Psychology & Marketing, 14(8), 737-764.
- Hoejmose, S., Brammer, S., & Millington, A. (2013). An empirical examination of the relationship between business strategy and socially responsible supply chain management. International Journal of Operations & Production Management, 33(5), 589-621.
- Hofstetter, J. S. (2018). Extending management upstream in supply chains beyond direct suppliers. IEEE Engineering Management Review, 46(1), 106-116.
- Hunt, S. D., Sparkman Jr, R. D., & Wilcox, J. B. (1982). The pretest in survey research: Issues and preliminary findings. Journal of Marketing Research, 19(2), 269-273.
- Johl, S. K., & Toha, M. A. (2021). The nexus between proactive eco-innovation and firm financial performance: a circular economy perspective. Sustainability, 13(11).
- Khokhar, M., Zia, S., Islam, T., Sharma, A., Iqbal, W., & Irshad, M. (2022). Going green supply chain management during covid-19, assessing the best supplier selection criteria: a triple bottom line (TBL) approach. Problemy Ekorozwoju [Ecodevelopment Problems], 17(1), 36-51.
- King, A., & Lenox, M. (2002). Exploring the locus of profitable pollution reduction. Management Science, 48(2), 289-299.
- Laguir, L., Laguir, I., & Tchemeni, E. (2019). Implementing CSR activities through management control systems: A formal and informal control perspective. Accounting, Auditing & Accountability Journal, 32(2), 531-555.
- Lee, M. K., & Turban, E. (2001). A trust model for consumer internet shopping. International Journal of Electronic Commerce, 6(1), 75-91.
- Leuschner, R., Rogers, D. S., & Charvet, F. F. (2013). A meta-analysis of supply chain integration and firm performance. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 49(2), 34-57.
- Manavalan, E., & Jayakrishna, K. (2019). An analysis on sustainable supply chain for circular economy. Procedia Manufacturing, 33, 477-484.
- Marín-Vinuesa, L. M., Scarpellini, S., Portillo-Tarragona, P., & Moneva, J. M. (2020). The impact of eco-innovation on performance through the measurement of financial resources and green patents. Organization & Environment, 33(2), 285-310.
- Marković, G. V., & Mihić, M. M. (2022). Strategic Turnaround in the Paper Industry: A New Model for the Procurement of Recycled Paper. Sustainability, 14(3), 1475.
- Nyaga, G. N., & Whipple, J. M. (2011). Relationship quality and performance outcomes: Achieving a sustainable competitive advantage. Journal of Business Logistics, 32(4), 345-360.
- Pagell, M., & Shevchenko, A. (2014). Why research in sustainable supply chain management should have no future. Journal of Supply Chain Management, 50(1), 44-55.
- Paliwal, V., Chandra, S., & Sharma, S. (2020). Blockchain technology for sustainable supply chain management: A systematic literature review and a classification framework. Sustainability, 12(18), 7638.
- Pettit, T. J., Croxton, K. L., & Fiksel, J. (2019). The evolution of resilience in supply chain management: a retrospective on ensuring supply chain resilience. Journal of Business Logistics, 40(1), 56-65.
- Poppo, L., & Zenger, T. (2002). Do formal contracts and relational governance function as substitutes or complements? Strategic Management Journal, 23(8), 707-725.
- Porter, M. E., & Linde, C. V. D. (1995). Toward a new conception of the environment-competitiveness relationship. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 9(4), 97-118.
- Sahoo, S., Kumar, A., & Upadhyay, A. (2023). How do green knowledge management and green technology innovation impact corporate environmental performance? Understanding the role of green knowledge acquisition. Business Strategy and the Environment, 32(1), 551-569.
- Selviaridis, K., & Spring, M. (2007). Third party logistics: a literature review and research agenda. The International Journal of Logistics Management, 18(1), 125-150.
- Seuring, S., & Müller, M. (2008). From a literature review to a conceptual framework for sustainable supply chain management. Journal of Cleaner Production, 16(15), 1699-1710.
- Shahsavari, A., & Akbari, M. (2018). Potential of solar energy in developing countries for reducing energy-related emissions. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 90, 275-291.
- Shrivastava, P. (1995). Ecocentric management for a risk society. Academy of Management Review, 20(1), 118-137.
- Spekman, R. E., Kamauff, J. W., & Myhr, N. (1998). An empirical investigation into supply chain management: a perspective on partnerships. Supply Chain Management: an International Journal, 3(2), 53-67.
- Sukati, I., Hamid, A. B., & Baharun, R. (2013). Testing the effect of the supply chain management implementation on business performance: An empirical study. International Business Research, 6(1), 76.
- Touil, A., Ayad, K., El Hamidi, N., & Babounia, A. (2023). Toward greener supply chains: Analysis of the determining factors. Environmental Economics, 14(2), 114-126.
- Vaduva, S., Alistar, V. T., Thomas, A. R., Lupiţu, C. D., & Neagoie, D. S. (2016). Moral leadership in business: towards a business culture of integrity. Springer International Publishing.
- Williamson, O. (1985). The Economic Institutions of Capitalism. New York, NY: The Free Press.
-
Industrial development in Saudi Arabia: disparity in growth and development
Anis Ali
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/ppm.18(2).2020.03
Problems and Perspectives in Management Volume 18, 2020 Issue #2 pp. 23-35 Views: 3005 Downloads: 1021 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯIndustrial development in any nation plays a vital role in the strengthening of the economy and employs human resources as per specifications and directly towards the mainstream of the nation. In Saudi Arabia, there was rapid industrialization for four decades. Some manufacturing industries performed well, while some internal and external business environment factors influenced the others’ performance. The study focuses on historical development, as well as recent trends of well-performing and poor-performing industries of Saudi Arabia. Small manufacturing industries in Saudi Arabia are underdeveloped and need more attention to attain sustainable and progressive growth rate in the form of the number of establishments to enjoy the potential. Manufacture of tobacco, computer, electronics and optics, pharmaceuticals and transport equipment are the deprived and underdeveloped industries of the manufacturing sector. There should be some easy credit schemes for the development of deprived or underdeveloped manufacturing industries. To attain sustainable growth and development of the manufacturing sector, a positive attitude of the government towards underdeveloped manufacturing industries, favorable labor laws, and entrepreneurial awareness, technical and financial assistance are necessary. The growth and development of the manufacturing sector of Saudi Arabia will be helpful in the attainment of goals of Vision 2030.
-
Why banks should consider ESG risk factors in bank lending?
Sarwar Uddin Ahmed ,
Samiul Parvez Ahmed ,
Ikramul Hasan
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/bbs.13(3).2018.07
Banks and Bank Systems Volume 13, 2018 Issue #3 pp. 71-80 Views: 2817 Downloads: 1132 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯWhy banks should be concerned about incorporating environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria in the lending process? What is the motivation? This study aims to find the motives for considering environmental, social and governance (ESG) criteria in bank lending process. A primary survey has been conducted to know the current status and motivation for incorporating ESG factors in investment decisions. Sample comprised 30 private commercial banks (PCBs) operating in Bangladesh. Data collected were analyzed with graphs, descriptive statistics, and regression analysis. Findings of the study indicate that banks are mostly considering basic environmental, social and governance factors set by regulators qualitatively. They are lagging behind in considering the advanced ESG criteria needed for sustainable and efficient credit risk management. Based on motivation for incorporating ESG factors, it was found that banks pioneering in incorporating ESG factors in lending decisions are compensated through better financial performance. Findings of the study are expected to encourage practitioners and policy-makers to take more pragmatic steps to incorporate ESG risk factors quantitatively in lending decision-making process.
-
Integrated reporting and financial performance of South African listed banks
Reon Matemane ,
Rozane Wentzel
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.21511/bbs.14(2).2019.11
Banks and Bank Systems Volume 14, 2019 Issue #2 pp. 128-139 Views: 2769 Downloads: 540 TO CITE АНОТАЦІЯThe recent development of integrated reporting intends to address the limitations associated with corporate reporting practices. This paper aims to examine whether a statistically significant relationship exists between integrated reporting quality and financial performance. Secondary data was used, namely the integrated reports and annual financial statements of South African banks listed on the Johannesburg Stock Exchange (JSE) for 2010–2014. For the period 2005–2009, only the financial statements were used, since integrated reporting was not yet mandatory. The research design was longitudinal and it combined qualitative and quantitative methods. Descriptive statistics and Feasible Generalized Least Square (FGLS) were used to explore the relationships between financial performance and integrated reporting quality. The results indicate that there is a positive relationship between integrated reporting quality (IRQ) and earnings per share (EPS). However, there is no significant relationship between IRQ and Tobin’s q (Q-Ratio), IRQ and return on equity (ROE), IRQ and return on assets (ROA) as well as IRQ and economic value added (EVA). Moreover, there are no significant differences on the financial performance of the listed banks before and after the introduction of integrated reporting.
